# Your training regimen



## Thewayofthewarriorispeace (Sep 21, 2006)

Im just curious, how do you train?  I know it will vary greatly from person to person, and Im interested in getting some different views of training.  

Do you train only internal or do you add external (pushups, weights, weapons, etc. also, what kind of weights/external methods do you prefer)?  Do you train mostly alone or do you have friends to train with on a daily basis? When you train alone (and with others), do you focus on individual techniques, forms, weapons, drills, or a combination?  How often and how long do you train on a day to day basis? How many times do you do the SLD/other forms?  Do you consider training strictly when you practice, or do you see your training in every aspect of your life? 

When I train, I normally do mostly internal forms (SiLimDao, advanced SiLimDao) and some other internal training.  I try to do the SLD at LEAST 3 times a day, when I have time I do more, probably about 7-10 times medium speed.  When I do it less I try to slow it down a lot more. I also train with the staff, I dont know any forms but I think it makes excellent resistance/external training.  I know some of the shaolin form that I practice on occasion.  Sometimes Ill go over techniques with my brother just so they dont leave me, but I hardly ever get to train with my fellow kung fu peeps unless Im in class.  Also, I think about it almost 24/7, alot about the internal aspects of rooting and relaxation, moving from the center, moving the body as a unified piece- I try to apply these to every movement of my day. 

-keith


----------



## yipman_sifu (Sep 22, 2006)

Thewayofthewarriorispeace said:


> Im just curious, how do you train? I know it will vary greatly from person to person, and Im interested in getting some different views of training.
> 
> Do you train only internal or do you add external (pushups, weights, weapons, etc. also, what kind of weights/external methods do you prefer)? Do you train mostly alone or do you have friends to train with on a daily basis? When you train alone (and with others), do you focus on individual techniques, forms, weapons, drills, or a combination? How often and how long do you train on a day to day basis? How many times do you do the SLD/other forms? Do you consider training strictly when you practice, or do you see your training in every aspect of your life?
> 
> ...


 
All I can tell you is that I would never train in weight lifting since it contradicts the Wing Chun theory of flexibility, positioning, and punch speed. I do Sui Lim Tao whenever I have time, since it's almost the little idea with 95% of the system's concept. I also train alot on wall bags and the dummy. Regarding the Chi Sao, I always take care of not making it that fancy rather than trying to seek the gap in the fastest time possible, becuase many trainers get confused in following the hands rather than seeking gaps, and that comes by practising Chi Sao as a sparring method and competition, and this is wrong. Regarding weapons, I don't train in weapons like the pole or the double knives, since I beleive that Wing Chun is all about what is effective and direct, the effective in weapons would be a gun, so that is my best choice.


----------



## Stu (Sep 22, 2006)

yup, i'd agree with yipman_sifu there on the weight training point. It can contradict and damage your wing chun traing. The physical excersise that I do revolves around my own body, sit ups press ups etc.. plus lots of drilling the wing chun techniques over and over again.. thousands of times.

My training week goes pretty much like this. 
I go to classs and train with my Sifu 3 times a week
I do the forms everyday.
I use my wooden dummy everyday - as soon as I get home from work i'll be on it for 20 mins.
I'm lucky enough to have it set up in a spare bedroom, so whenever I have a spare 5 mins its really easy to practice on. Although my fiancee does get a little annoyed when i'm using it when I've just got ready to go out for a nice evening out with her. while  i'm waiting for her to put her makeup on and i'll working up a sweat in my freshly ironed shirt.

I also use my 3 section wall bag 2- 3 times a week. I have to use it outside and its usually raining in Warrington , England so my wall bag usage usually depletes during the winter months... need to twist my fiancee's arm to let me set it up inside the house.

Also i find myself walking around the garden in Biu Ma stepping if i'm mowing the grass, in in the house if i'm hoovering (you end up with a nasty pattern on the grass if you do 45 stepping) or stood in kim yeung ma stance or biu ma whenever i'm waiting for someone, or washing dishes etc.... I get funny looks but i get them when i'm acting "normal" so i don't really care. 
I basically think of it as, how can I apply this household job or this spare time to wing chun training.. theres usually a way.


----------



## monji112000 (Sep 22, 2006)

I normally train Monday & wens 6:15-9:30pm and Friday 6-7pm. (Sometimes also on the weekends)


Normally its something like : 
First form, stretch, Chi sao , fighting drills , guided sparring, exercise.


Chi sao is normally working on a technique or a specific idea, and then free Chi sao.


Fighting drills can start with working alone in front of a the mirror doing a technique or combining a techniques. Then Working with another person or a three way drill. Also Circle drills are common also. 
Normally sparring with focus on what we did earlier. 


Its normal for things to have a set idea for the whole day. So it could be working on turning the horse, in chi sao, drills, sparring ect.. or Using the Qwan sao in Chi sao, sparring, ect.. 


I used to do weight lifting allot, it can be very beneficial to any athlete. If done correctly and gear for your &#8220;sport&#8221;, the only problems can come from being sore when you are training. I have changed my auxiliary training to more cardio, heavy bag, Wing Chun Tire, Long pole drills, and high rep low weight lifting. I have been experimenting with CST ideas, and using it for training Wing Chun ideas. 


When I had more time I would do a set solo workout. X # of this type of punch or turn my horse Y times then hit the bag and Tire.


I have been working more on my Shock pushups, and other related exercises.


Weight training has nothing to do with flexibility, speed or positioning. I have had the pleasure of meeting pro lifters who are more flexible than you could even imagine. Sure once you get too big its becomes a major issue.. but really most people will not get that big. MAYBE a inch or two at most. Its best to have a strong muscle to work with.


----------



## Secret_of_Steel (Sep 22, 2006)

I do more external training, weight lifting, cardio and isometrics. Mostly in solitude, so mirrior training and creativity are my best pals. I don't have a wooden dummy so I practice with trees. Making one would be interesting. When I have used the wooden dummy in clubs I have used a rubber knife just to experiment.


----------



## ed-swckf (Sep 22, 2006)

Secret_of_Steel said:


> I do more external training, weight lifting, cardio and isometrics. Mostly in solitude, so mirrior training and creativity are my best pals. I don't have a wooden dummy so I practice with trees. Making one would be interesting. When I have used the wooden dummy in clubs I have used a rubber knife just to experiment.


 

You used a rubber knife on a wooden dummy?  Why?


----------



## Secret_of_Steel (Sep 22, 2006)

To try trapping with something in my hand.


----------



## ed-swckf (Sep 23, 2006)

Secret_of_Steel said:


> To try trapping with something in my hand.


 
Explain, i'm not sure what you mean?  Do you mean you have a rubber knife in your hand and use that to trap, or the other hand?, what are you trapping on the dummy?


----------



## Secret_of_Steel (Sep 23, 2006)

I was just experimenting, try it sometime. Look to see where the rubber knife can touch while you have a reference point.


----------



## Ali Rahim (Sep 23, 2006)

Thewayofthewarriorispeace said:


> Im just curious, how do you train? I know it will vary greatly from person to person, and Im interested in getting some different views of training.
> 
> Do you train only internal or do you add external (pushups, weights, weapons, etc. also, what kind of weights/external methods do you prefer)? Do you train mostly alone or do you have friends to train with on a daily basis? When you train alone (and with others), do you focus on individual techniques, forms, weapons, drills, or a combination? How often and how long do you train on a day to day basis? How many times do you do the SLD/other forms? Do you consider training strictly when you practice, or do you see your training in every aspect of your life?
> 
> ...


 
Wing Chun right from the start must be train accordingly within Sil Lum Tao little ideal or "mind set, applications are nothing without a strong understanding of little ideal, nothing more than getting self in the way, making the little ideal a major problem.  

Form, stance, close detail on structure, line theory and sensitivity is what should be study for the first two years of your wing chun studies, drills and applications are last.


----------



## Thewayofthewarriorispeace (Sep 23, 2006)

As far as weight training and other external methods, I believe training with 'functional strength' in mind is key. This means training with relatively small weight, preferably with a natural object (wooden staff, sand, water) with many reps to get the tensile strength without compromising speed, sensitiviy, or flexibility. Also I think that ANY external training should ALWAYS be preceded by, and followed by, complete relaxation and stretching starting from the neck down, then SLD. I also think that each exersize should focus on a specific muscle group while keeping all of the others relaxed. I understand that technique should always come first, but I think its important to get very strong without bulking up, especially when youre young (as my Sifu says alot - he says to get strong while youre young, and when you get older work on refining your technique) because in a real encounter strength will come in handy, esp. if more than one guy gangs up on you. I also think that the Li (mind) and Qi energy can 'help along' the muscles to gain extraordinary strength without bulking up or necessarily looking strong, so therefore the more 'quality' muscles you have will exponentially increase your power. I mean, most (if not all) internal disciplines, even wing chun, have some external training in them, and vice versa. So most of all I think its important to have a good balance between strength and technique, with much more empasis on the latter. 

Ali Rahim, I understand what you are saying about focusing on SLD and stances for the first two years - my Sifu talks about this ALL the time. He says, if you cant win the fight with Pok Sau Tan Sau, you arent ready for any more advanced techniques. He says they used to do SLD fifty - seventy times a day. The thing is, our class is mixed up with no sashes, white sashes all the way up to red sash - so he shows a lot of advanced technique (for their benifit) which I admit I am not really ready for. So I really am trying to focus on the SLD for now, but Im writing down and trying to remember all of the techniques he shows us, so when I am ready, I can practise practise practise. 

Thanks for your replies and input


----------



## Ali Rahim (Sep 23, 2006)

Thewayofthewarriorispeace said:


> As far as weight training and other external methods, I believe training with 'functional strength' in mind is key. This means training with relatively small weight, preferably with a natural object (wooden staff, sand, water) with many reps to get the tensile strength without compromising speed, sensitiviy, or flexibility. Also I think that ANY external training should ALWAYS be preceded by, and followed by, complete relaxation and stretching starting from the neck down, then SLD. I also think that each exersize should focus on a specific muscle group while keeping all of the others relaxed. I understand that technique should always come first, but I think its important to get very strong without bulking up, especially when youre young (as my Sifu says alot - he says to get strong while youre young, and when you get older work on refining your technique) because in a real encounter strength will come in handy, esp. if more than one guy gangs up on you. I also think that the Li (mind) and Qi energy can 'help along' the muscles to gain extraordinary strength without bulking up or necessarily looking strong, so therefore the more 'quality' muscles you have will exponentially increase your power. I mean, most (if not all) internal disciplines, even wing chun, have some external training in them, and vice versa. So most of all I think its important to have a good balance between strength and technique, with much more empasis on the latter.
> 
> Ali Rahim, I understand what you are saying about focusing on SLD and stances for the first two years - my Sifu talks about this ALL the time. He says, if you cant win the fight with Pok Sau Tan Sau, you arent ready for any more advanced techniques. He says they used to do SLD fifty - seventy times a day. The thing is, our class is mixed up with no sashes, white sashes all the way up to red sash - so he shows a lot of advanced technique (for their benifit) which I admit I am not really ready for. So I really am trying to focus on the SLD for now, but Im writing down and trying to remember all of the techniques he shows us, so when I am ready, I can practise practise practise.
> 
> Thanks for your replies and input


 

Anytime, I love to talk wing chun to anyone who will listen and reply back, because I always want to know whats on other peoples minds.  Im not the best but I know what I am, and thats a good wing chun hoe.

Stay up little brother, and snatch their backs clean out with lop sao, through relaxation and chum (sinking energy).


----------



## ed-swckf (Sep 24, 2006)

Secret_of_Steel said:


> I was just experimenting, try it sometime. Look to see where the rubber knife can touch while you have a reference point.


 
Why, whats the benifit of this?  What are you training?  its certainly not knife skills, where couldn't the knife touch?  you are stood in front of a dummy that is inanimate, this really baffles me.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 14, 2007)

yipman_sifu said:


> All I can tell you is that I would never train in weight lifting since it contradicts the Wing Chun theory of flexibility, positioning, and punch speed.



I disagree with this idea. Weight training does not make one less flexible. Bruce Lee, who had a WC core, also disagreed and thought that too many martial artists ignored or pay too little attention to physical conditioning. Weight lifting is simply good for one's health. I think anyone who is medically able should have a program of cardiovascular exercise as well as resistance training.

Harm flexibility and speed? To the contrary, I think weight training would enhance your performance.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 14, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I disagree with this idea. Weight training does not make one less flexible. Bruce Lee, who had a WC core, also disagreed and thought that too many martial artists ignored or pay too little attention to physical conditioning. Weight lifting is simply good for one's health. I think anyone who is medically able should have a program of cardiovascular exercise as well as resistance training.
> 
> Harm flexibility and speed? To the contrary, I think weight training would enhance your performance.


I have sparred with body builders and weightlifters. They are the slowest MA practitioners around. It certainly is useful to be strong in certain arts such as BJJ, wrestling, karate, MT etc, but as a wing chun practitioner, weights and muscle do limit certain practices. Your arms tend to get heavier and less sensitive. How do I know this? Because I used to be extremely muscly. I have since reverted to a big fat guy instead, and found that my stick and sensitivity is better.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 14, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I have sparred with body builders and weightlifters. They are the slowest MA practitioners around. It certainly is useful to be strong in certain arts such as BJJ, wrestling, karate, MT etc, but as a wing chun practitioner, weights and muscle do limit certain practices. Your arms tend to get heavier and less sensitive. How do I know this? Because I used to be extremely muscly. I have since reverted to a big fat guy instead, and found that my stick and sensitivity is better.


This is anecdotal evidence. That means it proves nothing. I could just as easily say that Bruce Lee's movements were so fast that they had to slow down footage of him, yet he was one of the most ripped to shreds people I've ever heard of.

Do I understand you correctly in that you say becoming a big fat guy makes you better? Do you think your arms are less or more heavy now that you are a fat guy? Seriously.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 14, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I disagree with this idea. Weight training does not make one less flexible. Bruce Lee, who had a WC core, also disagreed and thought that too many martial artists ignored or pay too little attention to physical conditioning. Weight lifting is simply good for one's health. I think anyone who is medically able should have a program of cardiovascular exercise as well as resistance training.
> 
> Harm flexibility and speed? To the contrary, I think weight training would enhance your performance.



Muscles hinder your WC energy.  I see this becoming another ongoing argument between the different types of WC.  Some use muscles, and some dont.  Being that WC main concept is smaller beats larger, I think the style that doesn't use muscles and is based off structural stability and overcoming the opponents structure is the correct way.  Other people will believe differently.  Muscles get in the way and require complete relaxation to have them and not use them.  Muscles tense up in battle and the more you have, the less WC energy will be delivered in the punch.

It comes down to the sifu and the instruction.  I believe muscles are bad for WC, but good for health and confidence.  My confidence comes from my WC and not my body.

2 cents


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 14, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Muscles hinder your WC energy.


This is a statement without empirical support, and I don't suspect you believe it yourself. If you did, you would be finding ways to reduce your muscle mass. Are you prepared to say, "Catabolize your muscles to get better at WC"? I hope not.



> I see this becoming another ongoing argument between the different types of WC.  Some use muscles, and some dont.  Being that WC main concept is smaller beats larger, I think the style that doesn't use muscles and is based off structural stability and overcoming the opponents structure is the correct way.


I don't think the main concept of WC is "smaller beats larger". The concept is that WC is not dependent on size, not "short guy wins".



> Other people will believe differently.  Muscles get in the way and require complete relaxation to have them and not use them.


I don't think WC says "don't use muscles". Otherwise, you would be prone on the floor. How do you think a punch happens?



> Muscles tense up in battle and the more you have, the less WC energy will be delivered in the punch.


This is all conjectural. I have no idea what "WC energy" is supposed to mean, as that is not a term used in science. However, do you really wish to say that a person with a smaller tricep is going to deliver a more powerful punch than someone with a larger tricep, all other things (training, experience, etc) being equal?



> It comes down to the sifu and the instruction.  I believe muscles are bad for WC, but good for health and confidence.  My confidence comes from my WC and not my body.


Too bad that the instrument of your WC is your body.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 14, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> This is a statement without empirical support, and I don't suspect you believe it yourself. If you did, you would be finding ways to reduce your muscle mass. Are you prepared to say, "Catabolize your muscles to get better at WC"? I hope not.
> 
> 
> I don't think the main concept of WC is "smaller beats larger". The concept is that WC is not dependent on size, not "short guy wins".
> ...



See, I can predict the future....an argument.  Not going into this again.  Was just stating that some go one way and others go the other.  

Id like to explain all that it is that you quoted me on, but I would just suggest that you find a sifu and ask him yourself.  This way you will actually learn what it is that I'm talking about, as appose to read about it and argue against it.  If you haven't heard of WC energy, you have a bit of research to do.  Our power doesn't come from muscle but rather energy transfered between the opponent and the earth.  Using muscles during this transition adds resistance to your natural flow of the joints.  

Keep in mind....We're talking WC right?  and not WT?  because that's a horse of another color, that believes its a dog.

It honestly just sounds like you're naive, which there's nothing wrong with that and isn't intended as a personal attack...I just wouldn't go breaking down peoples post because your ideology is different.

Unless you're just wanting to stir up the nest, which then the admins will hop on fast.  As I have learned from experience


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 14, 2007)

brocklee said:


> See, I can predict the future....an argument.  Not going into this again.  Was just stating that some go one way and others go the other.


Just because someone is not saying, "You are 100$ correct" does not mean an argument is taking place.



> Id like to explain all that it is that you quoted me on, but I would just suggest that you find a sifu and ask him yourself.  This way you will actually learn what it is that I'm talking about, as appose to read about it and argue against it.  If you haven't heard of WC energy, you have a bit of research to do.  Our power doesn't come from muscle but rather energy transfered between the opponent and the earth.  Using muscles during this transition adds resistance to your natural flow of the joints.


I'm sorry, but "energy transferred between the opponent and the earth" is nonsense. Having a physics degree simply does not allow me to swallow that. No amount of research is going to convince me that "WC energy" existed. There's potential, kinetic, chemical, and other types of energy, but no WC energy. Is WC energy measured in joules?

Natural flow of the joints? I don't even know what that is supposed to mean.



> Keep in mind....We're talking WC right?  and not WT?  because that's a horse of another color, that believes its a dog.


I was simply speaking to the science of your claims.



> It honestly just sounds like you're naive, which there's nothing wrong with that and isn't intended as a personal attack...I just wouldn't go breaking down peoples post because your ideology is different.


I don't consider mechanical physics to be an ideology.


----------



## Logan (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Muscles hinder your WC energy. I see this becoming another ongoing argument between the different types of WC. Some use muscles, and some dont. Being that WC main concept is smaller beats larger, I think the style that doesn't use muscles and is based off structural stability and overcoming the opponents structure is the correct way. Other people will believe differently. Muscles get in the way and require complete relaxation to have them and not use them. Muscles tense up in battle and the more you have, the less WC energy will be delivered in the punch.
> 
> It comes down to the sifu and the instruction. I believe muscles are bad for WC, but good for health and confidence. My confidence comes from my WC and not my body.
> 
> 2 cents


 
Sorry to ruin your theory but if you move your body it involves muscle, if you throw a punch it involves muscles.

Weight training is about resistance... If you punch air that is a form of resistance, if you lift weights, that also is a form of resistance.

What I think is the confusion here is that the concept of CORRECT weight training is misunderstood. You can lift weights without building muscle mass - plyometrics and whatnot. This is done to train explosive power i.e. speed training with strength resulting in a faster, stronger punch.

Correct technique results in an efficiency of movement that is faster and/or stronger. Adding other forms of training such as speed and strength makes the whole process more efficient still.

I kinda feel that I'm having a discussion in the 70s here....


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 15, 2007)

I think that what brocklee is trying to say is that some lineages of Wing Chun generate power purely using muscle force, thus if they have bigger/stronger muscles they produce more power. 

Other lineages rely less on that and instead concentrate on being relaxed and unifying their body (bone) structure so that they have their entire body mass behind each technique. Tension in the muscles can easily cause this body structure to become distorted (therefore less bodyweight behind each technique) so they focus on relaxing the muscles until they are using the absolute minimum required to hold their structure in the correct position. Obviously having more muscle means having more muscle fibres to relax which makes the job of keeping correct structure more difficult. Also by weight training you are teaching your muscles to tense and push against resistance - the opposite of what you are trying to achieve if trying to use body structure in Wing Chun.

That is what my current understanding of Wing Chun energy is - being very relaxed and yet your opponent feeling like they're pushing against/being hit by a brick wall. I believe this is what the "energy being transferred between the opponent & earth" comment is all about as well - if your body structure is correctly aligned then when an opponent pushes on it the force is redirected through the body and into the ground. Similarly when you strike you have your entire body mass behind the strike and your mass is supported by the ground. Clearly you have to use some muscle to actually move your striking limb but you don't need powerful muscles to strike hard in this way. When I hit a pad, the strikes that feel most powerful to the person holding it are the ones that feel effortless to me where I don't feel I'm hitting hard at all.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Logan said:


> Sorry to ruin your theory but if you move your body it involves muscle, if you throw a punch it involves muscles.


I think you need to do some research to learn that WC energy somehow emanates from the earth via magic.



> What I think is the confusion here is that the concept of CORRECT weight training is misunderstood. You can lift weights without building muscle mass - plyometrics and whatnot. This is done to train explosive power i.e. speed training with strength resulting in a faster, stronger punch.


Good point about plyometrics. However, I think many people are making a false dichotomy that a larger muscle is necessarily slower and/or weaker, when that is simply not the case.



> I kinda feel that I'm having a discussion in the 70s here....



Eerie, isn't it?


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> Obviously having more muscle means having more muscle fibres to relax which makes the job of keeping correct structure more difficult.


That is not obvious in the slightest. In fact, it has no empirical support.



> Also by weight training you are teaching your muscles to tense and push against resistance - the opposite of what you are trying to achieve if trying to use body structure in Wing Chun.


As has been previously discussed, any time you use a muscle, resistance is involved. Even when you are sitting or standing, you are using muscles to resist against the pull of gravity.



> That is what my current understanding of Wing Chun energy is - being very relaxed and yet your opponent feeling like they're pushing against/being hit by a brick wall.


Hitting someone is another form of resistance. 



> I believe this is what the "energy being transferred between the opponent & earth" comment is all about as well - if your body structure is correctly aligned then when an opponent pushes on it the force is redirected through the body and into the ground.


What? Sorry, but this is unscientific. Force and energy are scientific terms with very specific meanings, and I seem them being bandied about here in a very odd manner.



> Similarly when you strike you have your entire body mass behind the strike and your mass is supported by the ground.


This is known as a truism. Since we do not levitate, our mass is always supported by the ground.



> Clearly you have to use some muscle to actually move your striking limb but you don't need powerful muscles to strike hard in this way. When I hit a pad, the strikes that feel most powerful to the person holding it are the ones that feel effortless to me where I don't feel I'm hitting hard at all.



I don't understand what you are attempting to establish here. You are confusing effort with muscle mass. Lifting 10 lbs is nearly effortless to me, but impossible for my 2.5 year old son because of my superior muscle mass. Do you wish to say that a stronger muscle would make your punches less effortless?


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 15, 2007)

*Tanizaki*, I see that your reputation is taking a bit of a kicking here.  

I don't necessarily disagree with the viewpoints you are raising but it might be a good idea to rein back in the argumentation stakes for a while.  

Involve yourself in a few less 'disputive' threads, get to know people a touch better and more importantly let them get to know you.  That way, when you put forth a strong opinion you might not get such a negative reaction.

Of course, as with any 'advice' on the Net, that's worth exactly the monetary exchange units that changed hands for it :lol:.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 15, 2007)

Tanizaki tends to do this on every post that has a tnagible argument. He cannot give rational arguments and so initiates troll like behaviour. 

He has already argued with several moderators and cannot comprehend that his comments show his limited experience in genuine, productive and friendly chat

My advice to everyone would be to ignore him

Peace out


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> *Tanizaki*, I see that your reputation is taking a bit of a kicking here.
> 
> I don't necessarily disagree with the viewpoints you are raising but it might be a good idea to rein back in the argumentation stakes for a while.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your helpful input. I will take it on board.

However, I don't think the validity of my opinions are dependent on whether I am a total stranger or a founding member of the forum. The validity of the opinions is only dependent on the extent to which they are supported by facts. That is something people should bear in mind, I think. To the extent that I have disagreed, I think I have done so without being disagreeable.

I appreciate your comments.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Tanizaki tends to do this on every post that has a tnagible argument. He cannot give rational arguments and so initiates troll like behaviour.


I think I have been quite rational. The fact that you do not care for an opinion does not mean it is not rational. To the contrary, I think it is irrational to talk about energy, an element of science, in an unscientific manner. 

I remember my first WC class when I was told that one day, I would be able to use chi to break multiple boards at once like the instructor could. He did not appreciate it when I told him that his ability to break boards did not require a supernatural energy field that binds all life in the universe. When he breaks the board without touching it, I'll be impressed. Of course, this is not unique to WC. During my first aikido class a number of years ago, they had me do the old unbendable arm deal and told me that was the result of ki flowing through my body. What a bunch of hokum.



> He has already argued with several moderators and cannot comprehend that his comments show his limited experience in genuine, productive and friendly chat
> 
> My advice to everyone would be to ignore him
> 
> Peace out



Thank you for your genuine, productive, and friendly comments.


----------



## Logan (Aug 15, 2007)

Oh bugger.....is this even worth the effort....

1) Please understand that if every muscle was relaxed you would be collapsed on the floor not breathing.

2) Lifting weights does not mean you walk around tensing muscles all the time. If you are stronger you can assume stances, positions etc in a much more relaxed state.

3) Remember that it is better to be thought of as a fool, rather than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Logan said:


> Oh bugger.....is this even worth the effort....
> 
> 1) Please understand that if every muscle was relaxed you would be collapsed on the floor not breathing.
> 
> ...



Quoted for truth.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Keep arguing, its funny to read that someone comes into the WC section and knows nothing of it.  

The WC I am taught is from the bone and structure.  zero muscle.  Movement comes from rotating joints by a spring like tension created by the tendons.  Argue away though.  Use those muscles.  Leung Ting is hiring


----------



## exile (Aug 15, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Bob Levine
MT Moderator
*


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Honestly.  It seems that a few members have migrated to the WC section from the Cobra Kai Dojo section lol.

There's more to WC then you guys are obviously taught.  That's fine too, because each lineage of WC is taught differently and the all have their advantages.  I was under the assumption the WC was a humble style.  If either one of you are WC practitioners, not you Kamon...we know you are , you would know that speed doesn't come from muscle, but from limiting the amount of distance the punch travels.  And that the power doesn't come from muscle, but comes from torque created by the feet.  These are simple things taught in the second form.  If you haven't gotten that far, you would be too nooberific to give an honest educated opinion.  

Oh, and btw...Im an orange belt now...I deserve a little respect...HAHAHAHA


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Keep arguing, its funny to read that someone comes into the WC section and knows nothing of it.


That's nowhere near as funny as reading someone talking about energy as if it were magic. Can you describe the mechanism of "energy transfered between the opponent and the earth"? What is the nature of the energy? I assume it is thermal, as that is most of the energy transmitted by the earth as a result of radioactive decay. That would be a very neat trick, as thermal energy is generlaly pretty darn hard to convert into useful kinetic energy.



> The WC I am taught is from the bone and structure.  zero muscle.  Movement comes from rotating joints by a spring like tension created by the tendons.  Argue away though.  Use those muscles.  Leung Ting is hiring



I'm sorry, but the only time you are using zero muscle is when you are in certain stages of sleep where the muscles are relaxed. If we wish to be pedantic about it, even then muscles are in operation. For example, the diaphragm continues to expand and contract.

Spring-like tension created by tendons? Tendons connect muscles to bones. They do not exert any forces of their own, and therefore, create no tension. Tendons only convey the contractions and expansions of *muscles*. If that is what your WC is teaching you, they are teaching you information that is medically inaccurate. The goat stance sure would be tricky if your quadriceps were to disappear, for example.

Speaking of muscles, you never said if you were catabolizing your muscles so you could get better at WC. Are you?


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> There's more to WC then you guys are obviously taught.  That's fine too, because each lineage of WC is taught differently and the all have their advantages.  I was under the assumption the WC was a humble style.  If either one of you are WC practitioners, not you Kamon...we know you are , you would know that speed doesn't come from muscle, but from limiting the amount of distance the punch travels.  And that the power doesn't come from muscle, but comes from torque created by the feet.  These are simple things taught in the second form.  If you haven't gotten that far, you would be too nooberific to give an honest educated opinion.



In what way does the form or any other aspect of WC training convey scientific literacy?


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> That's nowhere near as funny as reading someone talking about energy as if it were magic. Can you describe the mechanism of "energy transfered between the opponent and the earth"? What is the nature of the energy? I assume it is thermal, as that is most of the energy transmitted by the earth as a result of radioactive decay. That would be a very neat trick, as thermal energy is generlaly pretty darn hard to convert into useful kinetic energy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



AHHHH... must be a college student.   You know what I'm just going to stop replying to any thread that you touch.  I come to these forums to hear others experiences with this MA that I deep love.  You are an argumentative person with no purpose other then to create mischief and disruption.  I feel it won't be long before you're creating a new account just to post here.  Have a great life and I hope you cross paths with someone that trains WC and not WT.  They will show you how good structure and energy transfer works and that the 1 inch punch is very effective compared to the chain punch.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> That is not obvious in the slightest. In fact, it has no empirical support.



Ok then.




Tanizaki said:


> As has been previously discussed, any time you use a muscle, resistance is involved. Even when you are sitting or standing, you are using muscles to resist against the pull of gravity.



True but I am not denying that some muscle contraction is required. However there will be a minimum amount of muscle contraction that will be required to, for example, stand in your stance or hold a tan sau. Most people will use more tension than they need to just hold it which is a waste and can potentially be used against you.

I can see that what I wrote didn't very clearly convey what I was trying to say as I was at work & so wrote it in a bit of a hurry. Now I'm home I'll do my best to make it clearer. When someone pushes against you, the natural reaction is to tense up and push back. When weight training you do a similar thing to lift the weight. However if you are trying to train your Wing Chun so that you don't tense up and/or push back when someone pushes on you then weight training is not a good thing as it will kind of untrain the very thing you are training for in Wing Chun - not tensing up. 

Instead, when I train I want to set my body structure and angle in such a way that I am using less, and ideally the minimum, amount of muscle tension possible to hold structure against the force is being exerted on me. Then I can feel the precise direction of their force, redirect it, hit, whatever a'la chi sau. I see this as ONE WAY that a weaker person can overcome a stronger opponent and something that can be done even in old age when muscles are not as strong as when a person is younger.




Tanizaki said:


> What? Sorry, but this is unscientific. Force and energy are scientific terms with very specific meanings, and I seem them being bandied about here in a very odd manner.



I think that energy and force tend to be used interchangeably in the context of Wing Chun. I was trying to explain the quote in terms of force as opposed to energy as that appears (according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force) to be a more correct term in the scientific context that you are coming from.

I don't have any scientific proof of the fact that correct body structure redirects the force that someone might push on you with down to the ground. However in my experience when my structure is correct and someone pushes hard on it I am still relaxed, don't move & yet can feel additional pressure on the bottom of my feet. If I tense up I get pushed back or have to step back before I topple. I don't have a scientific explanation for this however I don't need one to decide which method I think is better for me by allowing me to easily deal with someone that is stronger than me.




Tanizaki said:


> This is known as a truism. Since we do not levitate, our mass is always supported by the ground.



Not strictly true as we do have the ability to jump, but I know that's not the point you are trying to make. 

Again, I think I wrote my post a bit quickly to be crystal clear in my explanation. When you strike someone, if your body structure is correct then they will bear the full brunt of the strike. You will have your bodyweight behind the strike and will be properly supported by the ground so you do not move yourself backwards or unbalance yourself in the slightest. If your body structure is not correct then, depending on how hard you hit & how bad your structure is, you can end up pushing yourself back thus the opponent does not take the full force of the strike.

I guess that the best illustration I can think of for this is standing in YGKYM and palm striking a wall. If your structure is good you won't sway backwards when you hit it. If you could hit the wall hard enough it would crack. However if your structure was bad and you hit with the same force I don't expect that the wall would crack & you'd probably fall backwards. However to hit it with the same force and bad structure I would expect would require more muscle power and/or speed to make up for there being less mass behind the strike. Note that I am not stating this as scientific fact - you are in a significantly better position to do that than me - I am just saying that is what I expect is the case. Again though, whatever the scientific fact is, it doesn't change my actual experience of striking with and without bad structure and the effect both have on a person holding a pad.




Tanizaki said:


> I don't understand what you are attempting to establish here. You are confusing effort with muscle mass. Lifting 10 lbs is nearly effortless to me, but impossible for my 2.5 year old son because of my superior muscle mass. Do you wish to say that a stronger muscle would make your punches less effortless?



Nope. What I was trying to say is that when I strike a pad, if I "try" to hit the pad as hard as possible I end up tensing my punching muscles more and don't actually hit the pad as hard as when I am more relaxed and I just hit it. When I hit in a relaxed way then yes, it is less effort, because I'm using less muscle contraction. I am not as strong as I was when I started Wing Chun due to stopping weight training. Consequently I now have less muscle mass yet I hit harder than I ever have before despite having done numerous other striking arts over the last 10 years before taking up Wing Chun. Might be a coincidence that now I have less muscle I can relax more & hit harder, might not.

Anyway, I'm not going to write any more on this subject as, aside from the fact that is isn't actually on the original thread topic,  I don't expect that we will convince each other either way. Not that it presents a problem to me that my, and other people's explanations, don't stand up to your scientific scrutiny (I've no doubt the feeling is mutual). For me the proof is in the pudding - I have found something that works very well for me at the moment and have just tried to convey it as clearly as I could.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> AHHHH... must be a college student.


Not since 1996.



> You know what I'm just going to stop replying to any thread that you touch.  I come to these forums to hear others experiences with this MA that I deep love.  You are an argumentative person with no purpose other then to create mischief and disruption.  I feel it won't be long before you're creating a new account just to post here.  Have a great life and I hope you cross paths with someone that trains WC and not WT.  They will show you how good structure and energy transfer works and that the 1 inch punch is very effective compared to the chain punch.


That is unfortunate, as I was enjoying this exchange of ideas. However, this is not responsive to any of my science-based points. 

Will crossing paths with someone who trains WC and not WT show me how tendons can contract and expand? That would push back the frontiers of medicine. I would also like to learn about this energy radiating from the earth that can be converted into kinetic energy. This would shake the foundations of physics. These findings should be published immediately so that a WC (not WT) practitioner can get a Nobel Prize in Physics and/or Medicine or Physiology.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Keep arguing, its funny to read that someone comes into the WC section and knows nothing of it.
> 
> The WC I am taught is from the bone and structure.  zero muscle.  Movement comes from rotating joints by a spring like tension created by the tendons.  Argue away though.  Use those muscles.  Leung Ting is hiring



Brock, you sound as though you are TST lineage. Are you??


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> Brock, you sound as though you are TST lineage. Are you??



No, Ip Man>Ho Ka Ming>Augustine Fong>Sifu Joy Chaduri


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Formerly of Leung Ting WT   Still paying for it with $$ and incorrect motions


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

It was silly of me to say that I wouldn't post on a thread that you touched because it would ruin my experience here on the forums.  Not only do I enjoy reading but I need to comment when I see a proper practitioner.

Daveyboy knows his stuff and it explains very well.  Especially the heel description, very exact....nice post !!!   

Isn't there a science forum you can hit up Tanizaki?  Maybe mrwizard.com or something?  They could use your vast database of info.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 15, 2007)

Interesting. The only lineage I've come across before that attempts to use absolutely no muscle is TST but it sounds as though you guys have a very similar approach. Hmm, I'll have to go read up.....


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> Interesting. The only lineage I've come across before that attempts to use absolutely no muscle is TST but it sounds as though you guys have a very similar approach. Hmm, I'll have to go read up.....



are you TST?

here you go 
http://www.hokamming.com/History.htm

http://www.hokamming.com/HoKamMing.htm


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> It was silly of me to say that I wouldn't post on a thread that you touched because it would ruin my experience here on the forums.  Not only do I enjoy reading but I need to comment when I see a proper practitioner.
> 
> Daveyboy knows his stuff and it explains very well.  Especially the heel description, very exact....nice post !!!



Thank you very much. It's all very well understanding what I'm trying to say but not always easy to explain - at least one person understands it which is good enough for me. Knowing the stuff is all very well, but I'd like to be able to actually do it during chi sau!

Thanks for the links, I'll have a look a bit later.

Nah, I'm not TST lineage but I do find their approach very interesting as the man himself appears to be able to do some really freaky stuff. I'm Ip Chun lineage but not one of his students unfortunately! I'll PM you if you wanna know my Sifu (don't want to post him on a forum).




brocklee said:


> Isn't there a science forum you can hit up Tanizaki?  Maybe mrwizard.com or something?  They could use your vast database of info.



:rofl:


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Isn't there a science forum you can hit up Tanizaki?  Maybe mrwizard.com or something?  They could use your vast database of info.



I think they would be much more interested to hear from you. They already know about human anatomy and the law of thermodynamics, so I'd tell them nothing new. However, they would be intrigued to learn that tendons can contract and human bodies can channel energy from the earth. It would truly push back the frontiers of science.

How many pounds of muscle do you plan to lose each week as part of your catabolism diet?


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I think they would be much more interested to hear from you. They already know about human anatomy and the law of thermodynamics, so I'd tell them nothing new. However, they would be intrigued to learn that tendons can contract and human bodies can channel energy from the earth. It would truly push back the frontiers of science.
> 
> How many pounds of muscle do you plan to lose each week as part of your catabolism diet?




I don't know why you keep stirring things up but just a heads up the kinetic energy is transferred from the ground to the point of contact through rotation and alignment of the joints and ligaments.  Tendons give the spring like effect because of their elasticity and relationship between muscular structure and the bone.   Not sure if you're aware of this but muscles do move around the bones.  You talk a lot of talk and to me, as I'm sure the others, you seem narcissistic and enjoy reading your own posts.  

If it makes you feel better, my kung-fu IS magic and sprinkled with fairy dust.  Feel better now?  It's not belittling to me.  I like magic and how it works.  I shoot magic missiles when my pok doesn't work.  

I only shed about 2 lbs of muscle a week.  Eventually I wont be able to walk but my wushu will be the bomb!!!


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Can I ask you something Tanizaki?

Just kinda putting things together...You graduated college in 96.  You we're what 24?  11 years later and you're 35ish.  A 35 year old college grad and on martial arts forums.  Then you come in bashing on WC energy transfer concept.  Would you happen to be a Sifu of Wing Tsun?  This comes up because I don't know anyone that would stick to their guns on bashing one concept, without being of a different system.  Anyone else that wasnt of a MA background would be more open minded to new things.  But you seem strong in your ways.  Do you practice or teach a MA?


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> If it makes you feel better, my kung-fu IS magic and sprinkled with fairy dust. Feel better now? It's not belittling to me. I like magic and how it works. I shoot magic missiles when my pok doesn't work.
> 
> I only shed about 2 lbs of muscle a week. Eventually I wont be able to walk but my wushu will be the bomb!!!


 
ROFL - well done, sir :tup:.  I have found from my own experience that taking yourself *too *seriously can lead to many conflicts that you could otherwise have avoided - {dubbed Chock-socky actor voice}Your powers of self-deprication are impressive{/voice}

*Tanizaki*, you seem an intelligent and articulate fellow and from what background you provide, no Spring Chicken either.  So I am puzzled at the fractious tone in your posts - there are ways of getting your point across without being contentious after all.

Debate and discussion is actively encouraged here at MT, after all without it none of us will learn anything from each other.  Divisive and negative argument, however, serves noone because as soon as you belittle anothers point of view the 'shields' come up and 'weapons are on-line'.  From that point it's just 'combat' and because of the isolation the _Errornet_ (copyright El Tejon, MAP) provides, noone ever backs down, whatever the weight of evidence provided.  Sometimes you just have to let it go .


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> I don't know why you keep stirring things up but just a heads up the kinetic energy is transferred from the ground to the point of contact through rotation and alignment of the joints and ligaments.


Really? I am surprised to learn that the earth radiates kinetic energy, the formula for which is KE=1/2mv^2. I don't suppose you'd mind plugging in the variables? I do wish you would stop making things up.



> Tendons give the spring like effect because of their elasticity and relationship between muscular structure and the bone.


As I already said, this is false. Tendons do not contract or expand on their own. The muscle to which they are attached has to contract or expand.



> Not sure if you're aware of this but muscles do move around the bones.


Do you wish to say that tendons move muscles, rather than the other way around?



> If it makes you feel better, my kung-fu IS magic and sprinkled with fairy dust.  Feel better now?  It's not belittling to me.  I like magic and how it works.  I shoot magic missiles when my pok doesn't work.
> 
> I only shed about 2 lbs of muscle a week.  Eventually I wont be able to walk but my wushu will be the bomb!!!


Shine on, you crazy diamond.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> *Tanizaki*, you seem an intelligent and articulate fellow and from what background you provide, no Spring Chicken either.  So I am puzzled at the fractious tone in your posts - there are ways of getting your point across without being contentious after all.


I do not aspire to be contentious. I simply state things in a matter-of-fact manner.



> Debate and discussion is actively encouraged here at MT, after all without it none of us will learn anything from each other.  Divisive and negative argument, however, serves noone because as soon as you belittle anothers point of view the 'shields' come up and 'weapons are on-line'.  From that point it's just 'combat' and because of the isolation the _Errornet_ (copyright El Tejon, MAP) provides, noone ever backs down, whatever the weight of evidence provided.  Sometimes you just have to let it go .



I do not think I have belittled anyone, but I appreciate your opinion and will take it onboard.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> Really? I am surprised to learn that the earth radiates kinetic energy, the formula for which is KE=1/2mv^2. I don't suppose you'd mind plugging in the variables? I do wish you would stop making things up.
> 
> 
> As I already said, this is false. Tendons do not contract or expand on their own. The muscle to which they are attached has to contract or expand.
> ...



as wise as you think you may be....kinetic energy is transfered by work being done.  There are more ways of transferring energy and you are stuck on one....heat  

For an object that is moving the kinetic energy equals one half times the mass of the object times the square of 	the speed of the object.  

Nice and rainbowy for ya 

I don't understand why you wish to go on.

You haven't stated anything related to MA.  You should check out howstuffworks.com


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 15, 2007)

Okay chaps, you're obviously not going to agree with each other - I strongly suggest that the fight is done.  If it goes on then all that will happen is that the thread will be locked.

In fact, it's wandered so far from the OP that I'm very tempted to suggest that that's done anyway.

However, perhaps we can bring it back on track?  One last off-topic point to add to the mix ... tendons *do* stretch, flex and otherwise store energy.  Trust me, I know from regular, painful, personal experience due to a fairly extensive injury.  Less painfully, some iai techniques rely on the 'winding up' of the tendons to switch,say, the hips around quickly to avoid a cut.  Think of them less as linkage rods and more as springs and some of the issues causing contention will not seem quite so irreconcilable.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Can I ask you something Tanizaki?


Yes. You may even ask me something in addition to that.



> Just kinda putting things together...You graduated college in 96.  You we're what 24?  11 years later and you're 35ish.  A 35 year old college grad and on martial arts forums.


24 is pretty late to be graduated from university. I received my bachelor's degree at 21, masters at 24, and law degree at 28. I am 31 now. Is your point that a 35-year-old would be too old and/or overeducated for this forum? Should I then assume that you are a teenage high school dropout?



> Then you come in bashing on WC energy transfer concept.


Yes, as described by you, it is pseudoscience. The earth does not radiate energy into human beings that is then converted into useful kinetic energy. That is just basic mechanical physics.



> Would you happen to be a Sifu of Wing Tsun?  This comes up because I don't know anyone that would stick to their guns on bashing one concept, without being of a different system.  Anyone else that wasnt of a MA background would be more open minded to new things.  But you seem strong in your ways.  Do you practice or teach a MA?


No, I am simply a person with a competent knowledge of physics. I do practice MA, but that has no bearing on the discussion of science. If scientists were to test claims about chi, for example, would you demand that they have some MA expertise? Science is science. I bash your "energy from the earth" hokum just as much as I bash aikido's "ki causes the unbendable arm" bunk. I do not discriminate.

Being open minded does not mean that one must abandon critical reasoning.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> as wise as you think you may be....kinetic energy is transfered by work being done.  There are more ways of transferring energy and you are stuck on one....heat


Of course, heat is not kinetic energy. 




> For an object that is moving the





> kinetic energy equals one half times the mass of the object times the square of     the speed of the object.
> 
> Nice and rainbowy for ya



Maybe I should have used rainbows when I wrote *KE=1/2mv^2* (what did you think that meant?), then, as you seem to have missed it. Now, can you plug in the variables to describe the energy emanating from the earth?


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

So anyways, if you plan on using a WC lineage that strays from using muscles and is based of structure and energy transfer....I would say no to any intensive workout that focus' on increasing muscle mass because you then have to alter your skeletal system so that it may work the new muscle.  A lot of great points in this thread and a lot of wasted energy.  Not very WC.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> One last off-topic point to add to the mix ... tendons *do* stretch, flex and otherwise store energy.  Trust me, I know from regular, painful, personal experience due to a fairly extensive injury.  Less painfully, some iai techniques rely on the 'winding up' of the tendons to switch,say, the hips around quickly to avoid a cut.  Think of them less as linkage rods and more as springs and some of the issues causing contention will not seem quite so irreconcilable.


That is a good analogy, and thinking of tendons as springs helps to illustrate my point. A spring can store and release energy, but it cannot do so itself. A spring with no force applied to it is useless. Force must be applied to both ends of the spring in order for potential energy to be stored. In the case of tendons, this energy comes from muscles.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Here you will notice fairy dust at its best.  

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/303487/awesome_wing_chun_kung_fu_demonstration/


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 15, 2007)

I'm wondered if, perhaps, amidst the past couple of pages of posts, it's been missed that much of the argument is due to talking at crossed purposes?  Or at least mis-matched definitions?

As a long time practioner of both armed and unarmed martial arts I have to say that I've been internally agreeing more with *Brocklee*'s points (sorry, *Tanizaki* ) because I understood implicitly what he was trying to say i.e. that certain martial techniques rely on transmission of power from the bodies linkages rather than simple muscle movement from the striking limb.  

In Japanese sword work, altho' the muscles of the arms are obviously used to hold and manipulate the katana, the power of the stroke, as with most martial techniques, comes from the hips and thus, by sheer connectivity, the feet on the ground.

Is this where the misunderstanding has come in?  Is it simply a case of how *Brocklee* expressed the concept that has spawned all the combative words since?


----------



## brocklee (Aug 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> I'm wondered if, perhaps, amidst the past couple of pages of posts, it's been missed that much of the argument is due to talking at crossed purposes?  Or at least mis-matched definitions?
> 
> As a long time practioner of both armed and unarmed martial arts I have to say that I've been internally agreeing more with *Brocklee*'s points (sorry, *Tanizaki* ) because I understood implicitly what he was trying to say i.e. that certain martial techniques rely on transmission of power from the bodies linkages rather than simple muscle movement from the striking limb.
> 
> ...



As much as locking a thread sucks, I think this horse is dead.  Sukerkin take a look at his sig.  It's apparent what his intentions are.  If someone we're so smart and had so much schooling, you'd figure they would be able to figure out the simple meaning that most others seem to understand.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Aug 15, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:
* 
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Super Moderator


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 16, 2007)

brocklee said:


> As much as locking a thread sucks, I think this horse is dead. Sukerkin take a look at his sig. It's apparent what his intentions are. If someone we're so smart and had so much schooling, you'd figure they would be able to figure out the simple meaning that most others seem to understand.


Brock, just ignore the guy. Every comment he has posted has been unfriendly, argumentative (when there is no argument to be had) or insulting. Sometimes, you have to let these kind of guys post til thre hearst content - every member worth his salt knows what kind of person Tanizaki is and will not take his posts and comments seriously.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 16, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> As a long time practioner of both armed and unarmed martial arts I have to say that I've been internally agreeing more with *Brocklee*'s points (sorry, *Tanizaki* ) because I understood implicitly what he was trying to say i.e. that certain martial techniques rely on transmission of power from the bodies linkages rather than simple muscle movement from the striking limb.



He pretty clearly said that energy somehow emanates from the planet through human beings, but has yet to describe this marvelous mechanism. Even taking your interpretation as true, which is very generous of you, tendons, joints, and other "linkages" do not move of their own accord. They only move when the muscles to which they are attached contract or expand.

Your long times in martial arts, which I respect, provides you anecdotal evidence, not medical or scientific knowledge.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 16, 2007)

Aye, I concur that it's true that the energy 'stored' in the tendons comes from the movement of muscles.  What I was attempting to clarify was that it's not always the muscles directly connected to the striking limb that provide the force.

For example, the majority of the power in a sword cut comes from the hips and the actual execution of the strike.  Thus, you can have triceps the size of Arnold's and the increase in cutting power would be much less than you might think (particularly as well-built practitioners tend to have a harder time than skinny ones when it comes to stopping using overt muscle strength and developing proper technique).

As I said before, I think perhaps a misconception has crept in regarding the statement that the energy comes from the 'planet' - I believe what was intended was to express the concept that all the energy we expend in executing techniques essentially comes from our interaction with gravity and the ground we stand on (for without a firm footing all techniques lose power).


----------



## MJS (Aug 16, 2007)

*Admin Note:*

*Final Warning!*

*There have already been 2 mod. notes already placed in this thread.  This thread is steering away from the original topic.  Before it gets locked, I suggest everyone return to the main focus of the thread which is "Your training regimen."  If you want to debate other aspects, start a new thread.*

*Mike Slosek*
*MT Asst. Admin.*


----------



## brocklee (Aug 16, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> He pretty clearly said that energy somehow emanates from the planet through human beings, but has yet to describe this marvelous mechanism. Even taking your interpretation as true, which is very generous of you, tendons, joints, and other "linkages" do not move of their own accord. They only move when the muscles to which they are attached contract or expand.
> 
> Your long times in martial arts, which I respect, provides you anecdotal evidence, not medical or scientific knowledge.



You're adding context to what I said.  Transfer energy from the earth to the opponent.  If it helps, transfer energy from the ground to the opponent.  If for some reason you took it as magical fairy dust which protrudes from the earth, you're one of the very few.  Many of the members on these forums know what is meant by saying "transfer the energy from the ground or earth".  I think this is a good learning point for us all and we should make the best of this situation so that it doesn't happen again in the future.

Sukerkin, do you think we can make a sticky of commonly used phrases and their meanings and post it in the newby section so that the newer members will be aware?  It would suck to waste 3 pages again on having to describe down to layman's terms, what should be common knowledge.  

Tanizaki, your e-thugging started before I described energy transfer.  You can see that in your first response to my reply.  It's great that you enjoy arguing but like with most things in life an over abundance of anything becomes a nuisance.  You appear to have learned a great deal through your schooling and its nice that you like to allow that to shine.  There's more to life, however, when communicating and dealing with others and that is portrayed through social skills.  In that department you seem to come up lacking because you first response to anything is to contradict anything that has been said.  

Now, I'm only trying to help you seek happiness when I say this.  Google "forums+love+argue" and see if anything is more to your liking.  Here we enjoy discussing MA with active, positive arguments that usually result in benefit.  Not arguing arguments that result in more arguing.  I remember, a very long time ago, in kindergarten to be exact...there was this one boy that no one ever got along with because all he would do is tell the other kids that they we're wrong.  The kid just sounded moronic and was bullied a lot because of this.  He wasn't bullied because he went to a school full of bullies.  It's because society didn't accept his idiocy.  Not trying to directly insult you but that's a realistic term.  Here's a definition from wiki:

"Idiot" was originally created to refer to people who were overly concerned with their own self-interest and ignored the needs of the community. Declining to take part in public life, such as (semi-)democratic government of the polis (city state), such as the Athenian democracy, was considered dishonorable. "Idiots" were seen as having bad judgment in public and political matters. Over time, the term "idiot" shifted away from its original connotation of selfishness and came to refer to individuals with overall bad judgmentindividuals who are "stupid". In modern English usage, the terms "idiot" and "idiocy" describe an extreme folly or stupidity, its symptoms (foolish or stupid utterance or deed). In psychology, it is a historical term for the state or condition now called profound mental retardation.

I gotta get back to work, have a good dayhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=idiocracies+&spell=1


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 16, 2007)

As to my training regimen {all faint as a post about the original topic is made :lol:}, it's a light-year away from what it used to be.

In my old Lau Gar days I used to follow a pattern of:

Start the day with a 2 mile run
Cycle 12 miles to university
Dinnertime was sparring, kata or swimming
Cycle 12 miles home again
If it wasn't a dojo training day it was weight training or cycle time trialing
End the day with a 1 mile run

Now my training regimen is:

Get up exhausted and go to work by car
Have a nap in my chair or browse the Net at dinnertime
Go home by car
Do the garden or DIY
Play Gran Turismo, Age of Empires or Counterstrike (or watch TV with the missus) whilst drinking wine
Go to bed late and read until even later

The exception to this is Saturday when I spend a joyous three hours waving swords around and sweating a lot.

Quite a contrast - which is why I'm now considerably more rotund than I've ever been in my life (since I quit my 60 a day smoking habit).


----------



## brocklee (Aug 16, 2007)

lol, I have graduated to something somewhat similar as yourself Sukerkin.  I've recently incorporated a few beers to my daily practice...lol it's a trick I was told to use to help with the relaxation factor and still being able to maintain a strong structure.  The center axis tends to turn kind of rubbery though, but I believe that is what is taught in the third form anyways (taking the center axis, that line that took so long to perfect, and bending it).  Definitely adds fluidity to my forms.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 16, 2007)

brocklee said:


> You're adding context to what I said.  Transfer energy from the earth to the opponent.  If it helps, transfer energy from the ground to the opponent.  If for some reason you took it as magical fairy dust which protrudes from the earth, you're one of the very few.  Many of the members on these forums know what is meant by saying "transfer the energy from the ground or earth".  I think this is a good learning point for us all and we should make the best of this situation so that it doesn't happen again in the future.


Very well. Can you explain how human being extract the energy from the earth, and the nature of this energy?



> Tanizaki, your e-thugging started before I described energy transfer.  You can see that in your first response to my reply.  It's great that you enjoy arguing but like with most things in life an over abundance of anything becomes a nuisance.  You appear to have learned a great deal through your schooling and its nice that you like to allow that to shine.  There's more to life, however, when communicating and dealing with others and that is portrayed through social skills.  In that department you seem to come up lacking because you first response to anything is to contradict anything that has been said.


Yes, chances are if I post, it is to state a difference of opinion. That is because simply saying "me too" doesn't add very much to discussions.



> Now, I'm only trying to help you seek happiness when I say this.  Google "forums+love+argue" and see if anything is more to your liking.  Here we enjoy discussing MA with active, positive arguments that usually result in benefit.  Not arguing arguments that result in more arguing.


I think it is positive to chip away fantasy talk about unexplained energy with empirical fact. When that instructor told me that I could use chi to break a brick, was he helping me? I don't think so.

"*arguing arguments* that result in more *arguing*"? Wow.



> I remember, a very long time ago, in kindergarten to be exact...there was this one boy that no one ever got along with because all he would do is tell the other kids that they we're wrong.  The kid just sounded moronic and was bullied a lot because of this.  He wasn't bullied because he went to a school full of bullies.  It's because society didn't accept his idiocy.


I bet that kid is a pretty successful adult.



> Not trying to directly insult you but that's a realistic term.



I would never take being called an idiot as a direct insult, of course.


----------



## benj13bowlin (Aug 16, 2007)

For my exercise regime I try to work out for about an hour and a half every other day.  That ends up being three days one week and four days the next.  I warm up with stretching, then lift moderate to heavy weights for about 45 minutes.  
I try to vary my exercise as much as possible also, to keep from getting bored.  Weight training can get very monotonous.  I try to hit as many of the main muscle groups as I can while concentrating on maintaining proper form and using the full range of motion sop I will not lose flexibility.  Then I do a random cardio exercise for 30 minutes (anything from racquetball to the Stairmaster).  After cardio I cool down with stretching for a few minutes then I go home.  Take a hot shower and drink a cold beer.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 16, 2007)

benj13bowlin said:


> For my exercise regime I try to work out for about an hour and a half every other day.  That ends up being three days one week and four days the next.  I warm up with stretching, then lift moderate to heavy weights for about 45 minutes.
> I try to vary my exercise as much as possible also, to keep from getting bored.  Weight training can get very monotonous.  I try to hit as many of the main muscle groups as I can while concentrating on maintaining proper form and using the full range of motion sop I will not lose flexibility.  Then I do a random cardio exercise for 30 minutes (anything from racquetball to the Stairmaster).  After cardio I cool down with stretching for a few minutes then I go home.  Take a hot shower and drink a cold beer.


Pretty similar to me. I'll do weights for 45-60 min 4-5 days a week, with the time varying on what muscle group I am doing that day. Then, 30 min of cardio, usually on the elliptical machine.

At class last night I was mentioning that my shoulders were still a bit sore from the gym that morning. "you gotta drop the gym, man" was the reply I received.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 17, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> Pretty similar to me. I'll do weights for 45-60 min 4-5 days a week, with the time varying on what muscle group I am doing that day. Then, 30 min of cardio, usually on the elliptical machine.
> 
> At class last night I was mentioning that my shoulders were still a bit sore from the gym that morning. "you gotta drop the gym, man" was the reply I received.


 
Was it a Wing Chun class you were in? If so, what lineage/association? Just asking as I'm interested & find that knowing someone's school of thought helps me see where they're coming from in their posts.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 17, 2007)

If you are training daily in wing chun then I espect most martial art schools will advise you to drop the gym!!

I would never tell a student to stop going to the gym but would express concern about how they were training. 

It is not good to bench press etc. Free weights are good though. My advice is to find a weight that you do not have too much problem holding and lifting and doing several reps. 

I have also found that a lot of bodybuilders/weightlifters develop too much of a grip which is detrimental to wing chun and sensitivity.


----------



## onibaku (Aug 17, 2007)

I live in a mountain so there are many trees. So I try destroying trees as many as I can with my hands and feet. I do this everyday


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 17, 2007)

onibaku said:


> I live in a mountain so there are many trees. So I try destroying trees as many as I can with my hands and feet. I do this everyday


 
Sorry, are you serious? What is the point of that? Trees don't hit back


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 17, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> Was it a Wing Chun class you were in? If so, what lineage/association? Just asking as I'm interested & find that knowing someone's school of thought helps me see where they're coming from in their posts.


Moy Yat lineage. I will continue to go to the gym.


----------



## Tanizaki (Aug 17, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> If you are training daily in wing chun then I espect most martial art schools will advise you to drop the gym!!


My life commitments only allow me to go twice a week.



> It is not good to bench press etc. Free weights are good though. My advice is to find a weight that you do not have too much problem holding and lifting and doing several reps.


Have you ever been to a gym? A bench press is done with free weights. Ok, maybe you could say a Smith press is not free weights.

Also, most people don't just do several reps; they do a few sets of multiple reps. I generally do 3x10.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 17, 2007)

*Tanizaki*, I can only suggest one more time that if you want a productive experience here you might desire to be a tad less conflict orientated in your posting.

Perhaps you don't see it but I find it hard to believe that if you have training in the legal profession you cannot construct an argument that does not contain an antagonistic element.

Do you have prior, out-of-board issues with those you are disputing with?  If so, it is best not to bring them here.  Altho' it is generally perceived that internet fora are public spaces, in essence they are really more like private clubs because the membership can, ultimately, be monitored.


----------



## profesormental (Aug 18, 2007)

Greetings.

Many times, people in the martial arts suggest leaving the normal gym training for several reasons.

The thing is that normally their reasons don't make that much sense... yet let me offer a "reasonable" argument.

Normally, training at the gym means doing a bodybuilder's type isolation training program.

These programs range in time from 30 min. to 90 min., 3-5 times a week, of movements that by definition do not train kinetic chains or "functional" movements. (This is NOT true of some exercises... yet it is true of most.)

These movements tend have limited use in Personal Combat situations... so in the mind of many martial artists, you would do well and better to spend that time in functional movements pertaining to Personal Combat training.

So what I suggest is that if you go to the gym, make your training more akin to specific movements used in Personal Combat training that use a lot of the body and not many isolating movements... except if you're "bodybuilding".

If you want I could share some that work well for me. Hope this helps.

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 20, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> My life commitments only allow me to go twice a week..


 That should be good enough. When I was at the peak of my training it was twice a week. 



Tanizaki said:


> Have you ever been to a gym? A bench press is done with free weights. Ok, maybe you could say a Smith press is not free weights.
> 
> Also, most people don't just do several reps; they do a few sets of multiple reps. I generally do 3x10.


Yeah for those who can! My strength is in my shoulders. I struggle with multiple reps of most things


----------



## brocklee (Aug 20, 2007)

onibaku said:


> I live in a mountain so there are many trees. So I try destroying trees as many as I can with my hands and feet. I do this everyday



OMG...HAHAHAHA


----------



## brocklee (Aug 20, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Sorry, are you serious? What is the point of that? Trees don't hit back




wooden dummy doesn't hit back either   pretty funny post though.  Sorry if this has been answered already, I haven't read page 6 yet.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 21, 2007)

brocklee said:


> wooden dummy doesn't hit back either  pretty funny post though. Sorry if this has been answered already, I haven't read page 6 yet.


What I meant was that wooden dummy is more about footwork and positioning. Hitting trees down seems like a mentalist approach to wing chun!


----------



## brocklee (Aug 21, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> What I meant was that wooden dummy is more about footwork and positioning. Hitting trees down seems like a mentalist approach to wing chun!


 
I'm sure he was kidding and if not, he deserves to knock em down.  They've gotta be dead already so no biggie.


----------



## CheukMo (Aug 22, 2007)

I thought training on trees was Muay Thai, but what do I know...


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 22, 2007)

CheukMo said:


> I thought training on trees was Muay Thai, but what do I know...


 
It is although they use banana trees because the trunks are softer & have some give - not quite like Van Damme kicking the bamboo tree in kickboxer :erg:!


----------



## ArtesMagae (Aug 26, 2007)

Hello, Everyone. I'm not trying to hijack the tread, just answer the initial question. I have been trying to put together what I hope will be a pretty comprehensive Kung Fu/Exercise regimen. This will become my training regimen very soon unless people start poking major holes in it. Any and all suggestions or questions are welcome! And if by some crazy chance you wish to start doing it as well, or parts of it, please let me know how it goes!

Note: The Kung Fu (kicks and techniques) will be done against the air in front of a mirror to keep proper form until I get a wooden dummy some day. The exercise portion is geared to losing a bit of weight (something I need to do) and getting toned but not built (they are all body weight exercises). It also might be important to note I train at my wing chun school for an hour and a half on Tuesdays and Thursday and pretty rarely Saturdays.

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Form*[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_Sil Lim Tao_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] &#8211; Three Times (Including Chi Gung)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]    (Will Add the Others as I Learn Them)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Warm Up *[/FONT] 
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_Jump Rope &#8211;_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] 5 Minutes[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Monday/Wednesday/Friday*[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_Kicking Set_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] - 50 Times Each Kick on Both Legs, Follow Each Kick with Roll Punch[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Front Kicks (Lead Stance)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]            -Lead Leg with Bil Sao[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]            -Rear Leg[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Round Kicks (Lead Stance)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]            -Lead Leg with Bil Sao[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]            -Rear Leg[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Side Kicks (Neutral Stance)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Donkey Kicks (Neutral Stance)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Stomp Kicks (Neutral Stance)[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_Cardio_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] &#8211; Forty-five Minutes of Walking/Jogging/Running[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday*[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_Technique Set_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] &#8211; 25 Times Each Technique on Both Arms using Both Lead and Rear Hand, Follow     Each Technique with Roll Punch[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Bil Sao Punch, Pak Sao Punch, Arm Roll[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Bong Sao/Wu Sao, Lop Sao/Fut Sao[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Gan Sao Punch, Gan Sao Punch[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Jut Sao Punch, Bil Gee[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Lop Sao Punch (Might Add Some Lock or Take Down, Suggestion?)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Pak Sao Punch, Chun Sao, Lop Sao Punch[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Tan Sao Punch, Palm Strike, Lop Sao/Fut Sao[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]_General Calisthenic Workout_[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] &#8211; Ten Sets of Ten[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Triceps Extensions [/FONT] 
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Toe Raises (Twenty Each Leg)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Squats[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        (Looking to Add a Good Exercise for the Glutes, Suggestion?)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Jumping Jacks[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Pushups (Drop Down)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Crunches[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Side Crunches (Each Side)[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]        Reverse Crunches[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Stretch*[/FONT]
 [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Chi Gung*[/FONT]


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 26, 2007)

Hi ArtesMagae. It looks to me as if you'll be doing SNT at the beginning of your workouts. It might be worth considering doing it at the end instead as it teaches you to relax your mind and muscles which I doubt you want to do before a workout! Doing it at the end should serve as a good cool down.

Also, I don't know how you perform SNT, but the first section should be done as slowly as possible, ideally for a minimum of 20 minutes but up to an hour if possible. Instead of aiming to do it 3 times I'd recommend just doing it once but for as long as you can....unless you can stand in your stance for 3 hours in which case you have my utmost respect :asian:!


----------



## ArtesMagae (Aug 26, 2007)

Thanks for the input! I think you are right. I probably should move that towards the end. I am undecided on how many times though. At first I thought to do it three times, still doing the first section slowly but not as fully as you mentioned, so I would actually be training the form (that is the order of the techniques and the techniques themselves). But now as I think about it, I do already know the form and all of its techniques, maybe I should practice it in a different manner!

Thanks again!

By the way, I was taught that the ideal for the first section would be a one minute breath for an outward movement and a one minute breath for inward movement.


----------



## brocklee (Aug 26, 2007)

ArtesMagae said:


> Thanks for the input! I think you are right. I probably should move that towards the end. I am undecided on how many times though. At first I thought to do it three times, still doing the first section slowly but not as fully as you mentioned, so I would actually be training the form (that is the order of the techniques and the techniques themselves). But now as I think about it, I do already know the form and all of its techniques, maybe I should practice it in a different manner!
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
> By the way, I was taught that the ideal for the first section would be a one minute breath for an outward movement and a one minute breath for inward movement.



Putting a 1 minute timer on motions of the first form is very western world.  I also feel that 20 minutes is a bit excessive.  Sure you should move slow, and that's so that you build a nicely flowing, smooth structure...but you shouldn't put a timer on how long it should take.  The point is...the elbow goes from here to here and the hand moves from here to there....and maintain a relaxed state.  I attended a WT school for a little while and everyone seemed to be flexing when they did the first portion of SLT/SNT.  Beads of sweat POURING off of everyones head.  The complete opposite of the concept behind the simplest idea.

Also, and you may not practice this but...breathing in and out requires your  chest to expand and contract.  Just keeping your arm straight out and motionless, mixed with the breathing you described, will cause you to make slight adjustments in the rotator cuff to compensate for the expansion of the chest.  Try breathing from the diaphragm.  This causes you to hold air down below the ribs and almost seems like your not breathing at all....yet you're staying very oxygenated.  It will remove the extra resistance that comes from having a full chest of air so you wont have to swing around it.  Center line punches also seem to shoot out easier.  So over all, its a more efficient thing to do.


----------



## ArtesMagae (Aug 26, 2007)

Thanks for the post. I am learning that maybe I should explain myself better. 

I would agree with you on the time limit thing. My Sifu would probably have explained it much more like you did. He only mentions the minute breaths as motivation I think. I think its his style to show us its possible to do better then we think we can to motivate us.

I personally breath as comfortably as I can when doing SLT or any Chi Gung but the length and comfort of a breath definately grows with practice.

And yes, diaphragmatic breathing has always been the goal for many reasons, but I haven't heard that one before. Thanks!


----------



## brocklee (Aug 26, 2007)

ArtesMagae said:


> Thanks for the post. I am learning that maybe I should explain myself better.
> 
> I would agree with you on the time limit thing. My Sifu would probably have explained it much more like you did. He only mentions the minute breaths as motivation I think. I think its his style to show us its possible to do better then we think we can to motivate us.
> 
> ...



I may be confused about the breathing....Is it 30 seconds out and 30 seconds back?  Does that mean it takes about 8 minutes to complete the 1st form?

I timed myself the other day and it took me just over 2 minutes to complete.  Nothing was rushed and the moves were quite accurate.  If 2 or 3 minutes isn't enough satisfaction, you can always start on the second form.  I really enjoy both forms but my favorite part is connecting the two.  It makes me feel like I'm graduating from concept to application.  The whole thing only takes 6-8 minutes.  I do 2nd form at a much slower pace, because the movements are much more exciting and maintaining a good axis is key.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 27, 2007)

I guess it's really a case of different horses for different courses when it comes to things like this - i.e. different lineages have different aims & ways of doing things so therefore train things differently. I agree with brocklee that putting a time limit (upper or lower) on doing your forms and the individual movements isn't a good thing as it can lead to rushing them and also doesn't allow your mind to relax. However I don't reckon that I'd be able to do SNT in just 2 minutes as it takes me at least 10 to get into a good state of relaxation & from there I've been taught to try and maintain that for as long as possible. Can't comment on Chum Kiu though as I've not started learning it - too much to get right in SNT first!

Just tried the centreline punch with and without breathing using the chest and it's sooo much easier when breathing using the diaphragm - upper arm doesn't catch on my pec muscle. I'd always thought of the diaphragm breathing from the perspective of maintaining bone structure but this is another good reason. Cheers 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 27, 2007)

brocklee said:


> I attended a WT school for a little while and everyone seemed to be flexing when they did the first portion of SLT/SNT.  Beads of sweat POURING off of everyones head.  The complete opposite of the concept behind the simplest idea.



I had a similar experience with my old Wing Chun class. We were taught to pull our Wu Sau back in the first section of SNT using the lat muscles. To this day I've still don't know the reason for doing it that way & was never given the answer in the old class which was one of the reasons I left!


----------



## brocklee (Aug 27, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> I guess it's really a case of different horses for different courses when it comes to things like this - i.e. different lineages have different aims & ways of doing things so therefore train things differently. I agree with brocklee that putting a time limit (upper or lower) on doing your forms and the individual movements isn't a good thing as it can lead to rushing them and also doesn't allow your mind to relax. However I don't reckon that I'd be able to do SNT in just 2 minutes as it takes me at least 10 to get into a good state of relaxation & from there I've been taught to try and maintain that for as long as possible.



I believe that we're talking about 2 different types of relaxation.  The way that I have been taught, relaxation means to not use the muscle.  Once you learn how to do the motions without using unnecessary muscles, you wont need to get into a state of relaxation.  You simply do the moves and the muscles remain relaxed.  The way that you state it takes at least 10 minutes to get into a good state of relaxation, makes it sound like your using SNT/SLT in a therapeutic manner.  Kinda the wrong relaxation, from what I was told.  You're not needing to fall asleep or relieve stress, you simply want to eliminate any added resistance that may deplete power from our already not so powerful punch   The type of relaxation you appear to be talking about is best found in the north style of tai chi.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 28, 2007)

brocklee said:


> I believe that we're talking about 2 different types of relaxation.  The way that I have been taught, relaxation means to not use the muscle.  Once you learn how to do the motions without using unnecessary muscles, you wont need to get into a state of relaxation.  You simply do the moves and the muscles remain relaxed.  The way that you state it takes at least 10 minutes to get into a good state of relaxation, makes it sound like your using SNT/SLT in a therapeutic manner.  Kinda the wrong relaxation, from what I was told.  You're not needing to fall asleep or relieve stress, you simply want to eliminate any added resistance that may deplete power from our already not so powerful punch   The type of relaxation you appear to be talking about is best found in the north style of tai chi.



I actually think we're both talking about the same type of relaxation in terms of using no unnecessary muscle to perform the movements. We're both trying to achieve the same goal but taking slightly different paths to do so. I find that even when doing the techniqies very slowly there is still all kinds of tension in various muscles that doesn't need to be there which I don't believe I would feel if I did the techniques any faster. Then again, the tension could be there as a result of doing the techniques slowly and so may not be there if I did them faster. Anyway, no right or wrong way - just different!

In addition to relaxing muscles we also try to relax our mind in SNT to achieve a very calm state with no thought. This is what I find takes at least 10 mintues as opposed to 10 minutes to relax the muscles! From re-reading my post I can see why it came across that way though. I guess what we're trying to acheive is a kind of meditative state but after a lot of training we should be able to just switch it on at will e.g. for chi sau or in a fight. I've still got a long way to go to achieving that but find that during SNT when my mind starts to relax I become acutely aware of things around me and feel ready to react in a split second to anything but still be very relaxed in body and mind. Afraid I can't really explain it better than that but perhaps when I get better at it and have more experience and understanding of what's happening I'll be able to. I'm not sure whether this mind relaxation stuff has been added in to my lineage by Sigung or whether other lineages do similar things. However if Sigung did add it, the parallel you drew with tai chi makes sense to me.


----------



## ArtesMagae (Aug 28, 2007)

I don't want to cut the form discussion short, but anyone have any comments for the rest of the regimen? Either the Kung Fu or exercise portion?


----------



## brocklee (Aug 29, 2007)

ArtesMagae said:


> I don't want to cut the form discussion short, but anyone have any comments for the rest of the regimen? Either the Kung Fu or exercise portion?



There's already 96 posts....what is it that you're looking for?  We're still discussing our training regimen and are going in detail as to what speed works best for what practitioner.  There's more to training then just moving around and working out the body.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Aug 30, 2007)

ArtesMagae said:


> I don't want to cut the form discussion short, but anyone have any comments for the rest of the regimen? Either the Kung Fu or exercise portion?


 
Well you did, but perhaps form discussions would be better in their own thread!

Anyway, the only other thing I'd say is to bear in mind that even if you follow the best regime in the world, the way in which you do it will have a massive bearing on how much benefit you'll derive from it. For example, if someone is doing weights to build loads of muscle, lifting heavier weights for fewer reps will yield massively different results to lifting light weights for many reps.....even though they are performing the same exercises in the same order. Thus one way of performing the routine will give them what they want while the other won't. If their training goals are different then the other way might be better. 

BrockLee & I were discussing along exactly those lines except in terms of one of the main foundations of Wing Chun training. Like he said, there's more to training than just moving around.....like the WAY in which you move. Just some food for thought. Anyway, good luck with your training!!


----------



## brocklee (Aug 30, 2007)

DaveyBoy said:


> Well you did, but perhaps form discussions would be better in their own thread!
> 
> Anyway, the only other thing I'd say is to bear in mind that even if you follow the best regime in the world, the way in which you do it will have a massive bearing on how much benefit you'll derive from it. For example, if someone is doing weights to build loads of muscle, lifting heavier weights for fewer reps will yield massively different results to lifting light weights for many reps.....even though they are performing the same exercises in the same order. Thus one way of performing the routine will give them what they want while the other won't. If their training goals are different then the other way might be better.
> 
> BrockLee & I were discussing along exactly those lines except in terms of one of the main foundations of Wing Chun training. Like he said, there's more to training than just moving around.....like the WAY in which you move. Just some food for thought. Anyway, good luck with your training!!



Nice dude   I like the example.


----------



## ArtesMagae (Aug 31, 2007)

I think I understand. And I also think I will end my questioning by letting DaveyBoy and brocklee know that I planned on doing those techniques almost like shadow boxing and really trying to condition myself to use the blocks correctly when needed.

Thanks for the replies, Everyone!


----------



## DaveyBoy (Sep 1, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Nice dude   I like the example.




Thanks mate. Glad it wasn't just me that it made sense to!


----------



## DaveyBoy (Sep 1, 2007)

ArtesMagae said:


> I think I understand. And I also think I will end my questioning by letting DaveyBoy and brocklee know that I planned on doing those techniques almost like shadow boxing and really trying to condition myself to use the blocks correctly when needed.
> 
> Thanks for the replies, Everyone!



No problem at all. I would be slightly careful about trying to teach yourself to "use the blocks correctly when needed". As my Sifu says - what you see in Wing Chun is not necessarily what you get. By that he means that for any technique somebody is using you also have to account for the energy (force) and its direction that they are applying the technique with, not just the technique you can see. If you condition yourself to use the same response each time they do something, regardless of their energy, you could end up responding inappropriately by fighting force with force, and potentially being hit. Thus it was the thing that you didn't see (the energy being used) that was your undoing. That's a big reason why we're told to be soft in my school - so we can feel the energy and respond appropriately.

Perhaps I have misunderstood you and you won't be conditioning yourself to use specific responses in which case I'm sorry for doing you a disservice. I speak from bitter experience that it takes a long time (and a heck of a lot of frustration) to undo conditioned responses and I didn't want you going down the same path unnecessarily because I didn't bother to write a post! I spent a year, off & on, at my last Wing Chun school. We did lots of drills without partners including learning to turn with a bong sau and block across. I practiced diligently at home in that time as well. Unfortunately that particular response became so ingrained that when I started training under my current Sifu, EVERY time I did a bong sau during chi sau I did the turn & blocked across regardless of what the opponent was doing. Needless to say that my training partners would take full advantage & I got hit a lot (more!) in that time. Took about 8 months of hard training just to break the habit 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Anyway, sorry for the long response. Personally, I believe that training at home is about perfecting the actual structure and movement of the techniques that you do. Class/training with a partner is when you learn to apply those techniques properly according to what they do. I can't see a way of conditioning good Wing Chun responses without a partner. However, if anybody knows of some I'd be more than happy to listen as I could definitely do with improving my responses!!


----------



## bens85 (Sep 19, 2007)

At the moment my study and work commitments take up so much time, so unfortunately I don't get to put as much time in as I can to attending classes or even training, especially since I'm still relatively new to Wing Chun (about 4 months now).

I normally attend one saturday class that goes for one and a half hours. During the week, I try at LEAST to do some stretches and sit ups, or if I am not feeling too tired, I'll try to replicate the usual warm up/stretches at the beginning of my class and go through the form, and after that I try my best to recall the punches and kicks I learned from the previous class, but at this stage since I'm still learning them, I'd rather not put too much time into that only to find out that I've been practicing it wrong.

But I am considering jumping to two back to back saturday classes and possibly an extra one and a half hour class during the week if I can manage. Even though everybody laughs at me I take my training very seriously, although I still have a loong way to go.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 20, 2007)

bens85 said:


> At the moment my study and work commitments take up so much time, so unfortunately I don't get to put as much time in as I can to attending classes or even training, especially since I'm still relatively new to Wing Chun (about 4 months now).
> 
> I normally attend one saturday class that goes for one and a half hours. During the week, I try at LEAST to do some stretches and sit ups, or if I am not feeling too tired, I'll try to replicate the usual warm up/stretches at the beginning of my class and go through the form, and after that I try my best to recall the punches and kicks I learned from the previous class, but at this stage since I'm still learning them, I'd rather not put too much time into that only to find out that I've been practicing it wrong.
> 
> But I am considering jumping to two back to back saturday classes and possibly an extra one and a half hour class during the week if I can manage. Even though everybody laughs at me I take my training very seriously, although I still have a loong way to go.



Hrmmm...everyone laughs at you?  Might interest you to find another school.  Unless yer a clown, which is fine.  Sounds like you're doing what you can and joining these forums is another step in the right direction because it shows you're wanting to learn more.  Just throw some punches in the mirror and keep throwing them.  Start with like 800 or so at first...then graduate to 1000 and then 1500.  Once you hit the complete exhaustion point, probably like 500 at first, and your arms feel like they're going to fall off...keep pushing them up there and you're form will start correcting itself.  You'll stop using muscles eventually and your punch will be 100%.  Build structure too.  Find the proper way to get on your horse and hold it for an hour to an hour and a half.  Do it when ever your able to.  Then stand on one leg, do that for about 45 minutes on each.  

Having a very strong structure and proper punch will help you win most fights.  It will actually help you with a lot of things in life, other then fighting, too.


----------

