My experience with kung fu

[Shaolin]

Firstly - this will likely be my last post in response to you in this thread as I have no more time to play these word games.

 

I will address these final points just in case you are not merely a web warrior and are actually interested in this topic:

 

Any art must move in to make contact be it a trapping type system or kicking or grappling. The ability of the fighters to control distance and use distance applies to any art. The idea that you can simply keep hitting a fighters hand(s) as he tries to hit you, move and keep backing away assumes much, not the least of which that you are a supreme master of distance control or that your partners are terrible at it and that you are 'sparring' in a large open area like an arena...

 

In all my years of study I have never seen any martial artist successfully evade for the whole fight - this notion as far as I am concerned is absurd. The reality of the street makes such a tactic that much more absurd - when inside a building, subway, stairwell or alley one does not have the option of dancing around or continuously backing away - if you can then you had better just run away from the threat. Wing Chun assumes that there is someone trying to hurt you. In a real situation the street tough or mugger is not going to be seen dancing around or backing away - he will more likely be in your face - shoving - grabbing - punching - not dancing.

 

 

so let's presume I have the same relative reflexes as you do.

 

Then your in trouble - it's like starting a race in reverse and then shifting into drive a half second later - you will need a FASTER car not an equal one.

 

The problem with this notion is that fighter (A) will move FORWARD when you move forward - and intercept - that means your 6 ft target that you closed on just did the same - oops your in range now Since you (B) are already moving forward you will have to REVERSE your momentum in order to begin your 'run' - despite your twisted logic one cannot instantly reverse one's motion - unless your fighting me from inside your alien space craft. While you (B) is putting on the brakes fighter A is gaining speed and distance and attacking - if you can't acknowledge this hole in your theory then you are not speaking in real terms.

I could just keep back stepping and working long-range destructions.

 

In the movies.

 

As most Wing Chun people I have had many 'situations' where I stepped in attacked and as I came into range the opponent back peddled - I have never seen one get away unless they turned and ran – usually they hit a wall or ran out of the ring but I usually caught them. The idea that one can move as fast backwards as another can forwards usually doesn't work in my experience - let alone the problem of generating power while back-peddling.

 

If you are attacking a lead hand then of course you must realize that the lead hand can be fired as an intercept into your center with a step - which means the target had moved. I did try this a moment ago with a friend and when he stepped in to attack my lead I was able to shoot in and get close enough to hit him. Other times I hit his arm and worked off of it - but I am sure he doesn't have the mastery that you do. But it does not matter if the attack is short of the body - it is filling the Center - if your attacking limb is in the Center it will be hit - this may facilitate a bridge - nevertheless the attack continues in a fluid motion and distance closes. I personally have never seen anyone who could get away and stay away for long. If you say you can then god bless your high level mastery - most can't and a thug on the street isn't going to be running away he will be attacking - this is what Wing Chun was designed to deal with - agression.

 

 

About 3 inches

 

Nope, wrong again - if my fist is closed then you already lost that 3 inches so 6? There are even more (yawn) variables.

Ah yes, and other assumption of WC that I disagree with; the assumption that forward movement is what is coming at you.

 

Okay then forward movement does not come at you. Arighty then. Future WC students pay attention to this one.

 

 

At 6 feet, where are your hands?

 

In the Centerline.

Sounds like it would be fun to play with you. You in FL by any chance?

 

As is listed on all my posts - I live in the NYC Metro area.

Can you reference me to someone with a WC fighting posture at "belly-button" height?

 

It's actually about 2 inches higher than BB height - both hands close to the body aligned in the Center. Look around and you’ll probably find a picture, I don’t think this posture is that rare - oh the posture is done on Kim Yung Ma and there is also no lead leg - something the Muay Thai guys don't like.

 

Good luck on the debating team and in your martial studies.

[JerryLove]

Firstly - this will likely be my last post in response to you in this thread as I have no more time to play these word games.

I'm sorry you feel that way, though it explains why you don't seem to have tried to digest what I was saying, rather just argue it

The idea that you can simply keep hitting a fighters hand(s) as he tries to hit you, move and keep backing away assumes much, not the least of which that you are a supreme master of distance control or that your partners are terrible at it and that you are 'sparring' in a large open area like an arena

Certainly there will be times and situations where forcing distance does not work. If something just "worked", it wouldn't be called a "fight". It also depends on the intent of the other fighter. You never addressed my "you would simply cross from 6' regardless of relative position?" question.

Wing Chun assumes that there is someone trying to hurt you. In a real situation the street tough or mugger is not going to be seen dancing around or backing away - he will more likely be in your face - shoving - grabbing - punching - not dancing.

I would not recommend trying to turn this into a discussion of reality of a street-fight here. That reality varies from fierarms at range to grappling on the ground. I've been trying to look at pecific issues in isolation for the sake of a productive discussion.

Then your in trouble - it's like starting a race in reverse and then shifting into drive a half second later - you will need a FASTER car not an equal one.

You contradict yourself.

The problem with this notion is that fighter (A) will move FORWARD when you move forward - and intercept - that means your 6 ft target that you closed on just did the same - oops your in range now

Then your argument is that, at 6ft, the WC person will charge forward. The problem with the posture remains (I have a traget before he does), and you are, by assuming that the WC fighter will successfully close range, assuming who will win the range game.

you (B) are already moving forward you will have to REVERSE your momentum in order to begin your 'run'

I'm not sure what forward moementum you are imagining. I think the also comes from a non-attempt to look at what I am saying before responding.

In the movies.

Yes and no. Mostly I was knee-jerk responding to you attempting to force the subject change. The forward mvement of WC is not the fastest on the planet (with the standard drag-step moement that I have seen evidenced) and as such (given space) it should be possible to keep range. If it is not in a given situation, than it is not.

The idea that one can move as fast backwards as another can forwards usually doesn't work in my experience - let alone the problem of generating power while back-peddling.

Firstly I agree with the standard statement, but this depends on what speed the forward erson can / will put on. Also, I never advise backpeddling, but it is quite possible to move away from an opponent while still attacking him without backing up (look at the "widening circles" of pagua for an example).

 

That said, it may fail. In my expierence with WC people it did not as they did not move rapidly forward. Had they moved forward at a higher rate, then they would have closed and the fight would be different than it was.

But it does not matter if the attack is short of the body - it is filling the Center - if your attacking limb is in the Center it will be hit - this may facilitate a bridge - nevertheless the attack continues in a fluid motion and distance closes.

I'll give you a simple one to imagine (I avoid this because we risk the "action / counter" game of discussion). WC is in a standard WC posture, O is in a T-stance without a crossed leg (the bent leg toward WC). They are 6 ft apart. O leans onto the bent leg and swings his fist in a closing, horizontal swing to just inside the extended hand. O's arm transitions through "in front" of WC, but does not remain.

 

Presuming WC moves forward and O wants to stay out, O pushes off the bent leg and "steps" away. If WC perfroms the "kick-step-slide" that seems the preferred movement, it has about the same speed (perhaps less) as the push from the T-Stance. If WC does not do that, but (for exmaple) rushes, then range will be closed and we can discuss other aspects of fighting.

I personally have never seen anyone who could get away and stay away for long. If you say you can then god bless your high level mastery - most can't and a thug on the street isn't going to be running away he will be attacking - this is what Wing Chun was designed to deal with - agression.

Against many strategies, keeping range may not be possible (probibly wont). I agree with you. Continuious forward movement (as opposed to short lunges) is not something I have seen in WC; if it's there, then that sounds like a fun discussion.

In the Centerline.

And forward?

As is listed on all my posts - I live in the NYC Metro area.

I noticed right after asking, I'm new to this board.

Good luck on the debating team and in your martial studies.

Yea, you too.

[Shaolin]

Oh well got nothing to do so I continue hopefully with some resolution in sight. Let's narrow the focus a bit.

I wrote:

 

 

The problem with this notion is that fighter (A) will move FORWARD when you move forward - and intercept - that means your 6 ft target that you closed on just did the same - oops your in range now

 

 

You wrote:

 

 

Then your argument is that, at 6ft, the WC person will charge forward. The problem with the posture remains (I have a traget before he does), and you are, by assuming that the WC fighter will successfully close range, assuming who will win the range game.

 

 

I don't know you and I don't know what your intentions are but it seems to me that you are arguing with fallacies in an attempt to simply continue to argue.

 

"The problem with the posture remains"

 

No, this is a fallacy. Why? Because all styles have some leading targets and because WC does not require a long lead. Some styles/fighters lead with the head - foot - fist. Even you - there will be some part of your body closer to the opponent than the rest of your body - like your lead leg/knee – hand/arm as you swipe at his hand or head if you plan to lean - whatever - it does not matter - all styles/fighters have one part of their body closer to the enemy at one time or another – I submit that given this fact this 'WC lead target posture issue' is null and void and getting old. Ever heard of beating a dead horse?

 

The fact that a Wing Chun fighter's hand might be closer to you than the rest of his body is not worth 10 pages of discussion unless you are in it for the typing not the topic. Yes, if his hand is way out there it could be a target - so what - this is true for any fighter with any lead anything - that is 'out there' the point is it's not static and not going to stay in one place. If I tried to attack one of my elder senior's hands in his short but extended 'guard' there is no doubt in my mind that his fists would be in my face faster than I could say sh*t!!

 

Regarding distance and motion:

 

Even if the WC man has his hand way out there, you still have to move to HIM to attack it. You can't attack it from 6 feet away as you are so fond of pointing out. So you when you move in the other fighter will also do something - like:

 

1. Move his hand.

 

2. Move his body.

 

Using your ‘logic’ I could simply say that every time you move into attack the lead hand the WC man will simply step back or to the side, angle in - etc. So what? Is it really worth discussing that for 3 days? (yawn)

 

The most common reaction from a WC guy is not to step back but inside. If the WC guys you are playing with don't relentlessly attempt to close and get inside then they were not trained in the same kind of WC that I am.

 

So, if you are moving in to attack some lead target and the WC man steps in the target has moved. If when you step to him he steps to you then whatever distance you planned to be at will have changed by his movement.

 

Now, if you are 6 feet away and you step in to attack his lead target and in so doing you cover three feet and he didn't move you would be three feet away right?

 

6 - 3 = 3

 

If when you step in he also steps in three feet (intercept) he would be 0 feet away:

 

6 - 3 -3 = 0

 

The point is that there is no point. You must move to attack any target. The fact than the hand is closer means nothing because the whole equation is dynamic - You move - he moves - you adjust - he adjusts - you attack - he attacks.

 

If you say that you are going to stay out of range and swipe at his lead hand then he can simply retract the hand and stand there waiting for you to close. Wing Chun is very distance sensitive - no one is going to shoot from 6 feet away - or at least few fighters will from any style - though some will try to kick you from here - we do not as a rule. Most WC men will do nothing from 6 feet away - at that distance most people are not yet a threat or candidate for an instant entry. At this distance he may present a short guard or a long one I really can't say - it's not a style requirement. He may start to move slowly away or slowly closer to you while changing angles and move his hands around with respect to the angle and distance and you. In any case if you wish to attack any target of his YOU must move to HIM. When you move in you will have momentum. Depending on the distance the WC man may not move at all or he may angle or he may step AT you - but by and large WC is like a coiled snake (hmm style influence?) slowly positioning - waiting to shoot out and bite you - 'shoot out' meaning hands and body together like the snake using it's coil (body) to generate speed. Likewise the snake could care less about his advanced target (head/fangs.) probably because it is also his weapon. BTW: If you think that the Wing Chun step is slow then I can only say that you are mistaken - it is not.

 

When the WC guy moves in he will try to do it at a time most favorable to closing the gap - such as when you are already moving at him - in mid step you are committed and cannot change - do you understand that? (Reverse shift to Drive example you must stop first.) This is important. When stepping forward one has forward momentum. If you want to continue going forward or go forward FASTER it is easy to do since the body is already going forward - momentum. To change and/or go backward means time is lost because you must stop the momentum and then reverse it, or alter it which takes more time because you must brake and then overcome inertia AGAIN. (Not to mention mental state/intention/change issues) If you planned to take up a certain distance with your step and your target moves that distance is no longer correct for whatever you intended to do with it – be that an attack on a lead target or any other target. If you step planning a final distance of 3 feet and he moves simultaneously planning a final distance of 1 foot what is the final distance when you both complete the step? I would assert closer to the range the interceptor wanted not the aggressor - 'I move last but arrive first.' It's all in the distancing, but as you finally acknowledged it is harder to maintain distance than to close for the most part, which is what WC does.

 

In a street situation (which is quite relevant despite your objection) there is no 'sparring' game being played out that has little value IMO for self-defense.

[JerryLove]

No, this is a fallacy. Why? Because all styles have some leading targets and because WC does not require a long lead. Some styles/fighters lead with the head - foot - fist. Even you - there will be some part of your body closer to the opponent than the rest of your body - like your lead leg/knee

Depends on the posture. At the most elementary postures, it's resolved by constant motion of those parts. It would be akin to a WC practitioner in a constant chain-punch / withdrawing hand.

hand/arm as you swipe at his hand or head if you plan to lean - whatever - it does not matter - all styles/fighters have one part of their body closer to the enemy at one time or another – I submit that given this fact this 'WC lead target posture issue' is null and void and getting old. Ever heard of beating a dead horse?

Considering that your opinion appears closed, I would have to say that it is you beating a dead horse. The leading hand, in WC, in my experience; is presented as a relatively static starge rather far from the body.

The fact that a Wing Chun fighter's hand might be closer to you than the rest of his body is not worth 10 pages of discussion unless you are in it for the typing not the topic.[/qoute] This discussion is 2 pages in length. Not all of this discussion is on that topic. You are currently extending the duration and verbosity of that topic. You are, in short, bein hypocritical by complaining about exactly what you are doing.

, if his hand is way out there it could be a target - so what - this is true for any fighter with any lead anything - that is 'out there' the point is it's not static and not going to stay in one place. If I tried to attack one of my elder senior's hands in his short but extended 'guard' there is no doubt in my mind that his fists would be in my face faster than I could say sh*t!!

Well, if you can't do something you have not seen done, had not considered, and went in presuming would not work, then I guess it can't be done

Even if the WC man has his hand way out there, you still have to move to HIM to attack it. You can't attack it from 6 feet away as you are so fond of pointing out.

About 6' is the range at which one can hit an extended hand or foot of another combatant. It is not a range at which one can hit an opponent's body.

Using your ‘logic’ I could simply say that every time you move into attack the lead hand the WC man will simply step back or to the side, angle in - etc. So what?

You don't appear to have ever been interested in the actual discussion

The most common reaction from a WC guy is not to step back but inside. If the WC guys you are playing with don't relentlessly attempt to close and get inside then they were not trained in the same kind of WC that I am.

I can discuss instance-by-instance depictions, but I don't get the impression that you will actually listen.

So, if you are moving in to attack some lead target and the WC man steps in the target has moved. If when you step to him he steps to you then whatever distance you planned to be at will have changed by his movement.

This discussion of range is properly a seperate discussion. You keep changing the subject. We can talk about mainting vs closing range, but since you are unable to post a single post entirely on this subject, I see no reason to assume that you will be able to stay on the topic of range.

Now, if you are 6 feet away and you step in to attack his lead target and in so doing you cover three feet and he didn't move you would be three feet away right?

Yes. But that is not the scenerio I am discussing. I am talking abot being at 6' (however one got there) and attacking an outstreached hand.

The point is that there is no point. You must move to attack any target. The fact than the hand is closer means nothing because the whole equation is dynamic - You move - he moves - you adjust - he adjusts - you attack - he attacks.

And at any given moment you are at some given distance. If that is >6', then no one hits. If that is <5' then both can hit. If that is around 6', then the WC person has a target within his opponent's range.

If you say that you are going to stay out of range and swipe at his lead hand then he can simply retract the hand and stand there waiting for you to close. Wing Chun is very distance sensitive

So is evrey other art on the planet.

 

The reason I chimed in originally on this topic was because o the self-congradulating back-slapping that you assume that you magically do somthing different than everyone else. Every art deals with range, both closing and retreating. Every art deals with bridging, every art dals with angling. I'm pointing out a specific problem with a specific posture in WC, and you seem to ego-involved. This, unfortunatley, reenforces my original opinion that the minds involved ewre closed and the egos at full inflation.

we do not as a rule. Most WC men will do nothing from 6 feet away - at that distance most people are not yet a threat or candidate for an instant entry.

That's my point. At 6' a person willing to attack weapons is a threat to a person in the WC posture depicted.

At this distance he may present a short guard or a long one I really can't say - it's not a style requirement.

The people I played with were in a guard that was a target.

He may start to move slowly away or slowly closer to you while changing angles and move his hands around with respect to the angle and distance and you.

That's why it's called a fight.

 

You keep focusing on "what to do then". The topic, right this moment, is that there is a target which you have presented, which can be hit at a time that you cannot hit your opponent (presuming he isn't in a posture with a similar problem), and for which you don't have good protection.

 

Can you attept to close then? Of course. You can attempt to close at 6' against someone not attacking you too. That's irrellevent. You can always advance, angle or retreat; and so can your opponent. That's not being debated (as much as you seem to want to). There is a range at which you can be hit and your opponent cannot. This is a flaw of the posture.

[Shaolin]

JerryLove I am sorry that you couldn't put all that intellect into a more productive discussion. You're ignoring the main point continuously and attacking around it. Wing Chun is a direct system. We do not play around for long before getting down to business. On the other hand it seems that you do. Much like your sparring tactics in, smack, out of range - that's great. How is it that I've answered your issue several times but you still keep ranting?

 

Your issue was: Long guard no good.

 

Very simple issue.

 

Answer: There is no long guard.

 

Very simple answer.

 

The dynamic: You cannot accept the answer because someone you 'play with' did it the other way or because you just like to debate ad infinitum. Sorry but I can't control what your partners do or spend all my time trying to convey one single point, while you evade a simple message. Indeed discussing anything more complex with you must be slow torture.

 

Again, it is clearly stated - if you look at the writings of at least some of the Grand Master's of the system that the 'long guard' is not recommended for initiating combat. It has other uses.

 

Yip Chun states, 'Use the Long Guard for demos.' My Late Sifu did not recommend this long guard either in favor of a very short guard held close to the body. The reality is that when fighters fight the guard is dynamic and changing and oh so breif - not static.

 

That said, many a young WC student probably uses a long guard out of inexperience or for the fact that most guys just aren’t as swift as you are to take advantage - so we get lazy.

 

Cheers!

[JerryLove]

Thank you for the response. I have asked about alternate guards several times, but have not gotten a clear "I would not use a guard with my hads extended like the one you have encountered".

 

That simple statement would have been suficcient (though I likely would have asked "what would you use"). There has been some comment to that effect which then conflicted with other statements by the same poster. I endevoured to get a clear idea, but kept getting barraged with "I would move" retorts to simple guard questions. (I can cut'n'paste them, but see little point).

 

I don't think, however, that starting your post with an ad-hominym ("I am sorry that you couldn't put all that intellect into a more productive discussion") is a particularly useful way to de-escilate what is, for many here, obviously being taken rather personally.

[KungFuLuvva]

In my experience sparring with Wing-Chun practitioners, they did not adapt the had posture to deal with my attacking the limbs.

 

i'd have to say that is not true to the wing chun system. my dad and i are both wing chun practitioners and i've seen him spar against a sifu from some other kung fu (forgot which kind) and my dad started with the basic extended arm and the sifu punched really hard at the fingers of the extended arm and my dad just lowered his hand an inch down and the sifu was completely vulnerable to a series of attacks. What i'm trying to say is that wing chun is not this stiff system where your completely mechanical and cant certain things. wing chun is just a tool that you use when you fight. after all we're all individual people and your art wont fight for you, its just there for you to use. its like a guy that concentrates so hard on getting his form right that he forgets to punch. so if your able to hit their limbs then their just not using the system how it was ment to be used.