# Testing the root/structure



## futsaowingchun (Sep 27, 2015)

people have requested I use a big guy in my videos...well here is the biggest guy I could find..


----------



## geezer (Sep 28, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> people have requested I use a big guy in my videos...well here is the biggest guy I could find...



Yep, that's a *BIG* guy!

Now I Just wish I could see your whole body including your feet during this clip. Maybe you couldn't fit all that in the screen and still include your large partner?


----------



## JPinAZ (Sep 28, 2015)

yeah, big guy for sure - can't fault ya for using a small guy on this one!

It looks like your backhand is supporting your front hand behind the forearm and is what's really taking the load when the front had starts folding (?) If so, I'd say while this is showing a 'form of structure', some might view this as 'cheating' 

When I am testing WC structure on a student, they would have to do it without the back hand supporting and see if the front hand alignment can withstand the pressure on it's own (as long as the test is also fair for the given structure, facing, etc).


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 29, 2015)

geezer said:


> Yep, that's a *BIG* guy!
> 
> Now I Just wish I could see your whole body including your feet during this clip. Maybe you couldn't fit all that in the screen and still include your large partner?


The guy filed it 


geezer said:


> Yep, that's a *BIG* guy!
> 
> Now I Just wish I could see your whole body including your feet during this clip. Maybe you couldn't fit all that in the screen and still include your large partner?




The guy filmed it  to close. I asked him to make sure to get my feet in but he didn't..I had my right foot forward and my left leg took all that weight he was coming down on me.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 29, 2015)

JPinAZ said:


> yeah, big guy for sure - can't fault ya for using a small guy on this one!
> 
> It looks like your backhand is supporting your front hand behind the forearm and is what's really taking the load when the front had starts folding (?) If so, I'd say while this is showing a 'form of structure', some might view this as 'cheating'
> 
> When I am testing WC structure on a student, they would have to do it without the back hand supporting and see if the front hand alignment can withstand the pressure on it's own (as long as the test is also fair for the given structure, facing, etc).



This guy is way to heavy!!! it was like trying to hold back a small car..your right I had to support or reinforce my right arm with my left. because he was just to big..


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 29, 2015)

Anyway, I wanted to see if I could do it. If I can hold him most people are very easy.


----------



## JPinAZ (Sep 29, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> This guy is way to heavy!!! it was like trying to hold back a small car..your right I had to support or reinforce my right arm with my left. because he was just to big..



Fair enough.
But then it begs the question, what use is the structure if it doesn't hold up? If the structure is sound and the test is correct, size shouldn't matter. Now, I'm not saying I could/couldn't do any better against a person of that size without changing to something else, but now I'm wondering what's the value in the demo...


----------



## johnsimmons (Sep 29, 2015)

It seems my understanding of structure is different.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 29, 2015)

JPinAZ said:


> Fair enough.
> But then it begs the question, what use is the structure if it doesn't hold up? If the structure is sound and the test is correct, size shouldn't matter. Now, I'm not saying I could/couldn't do any better against a person of that size without changing to something else, but now I'm wondering what's the value in the demo...



Structure does work I just proved it. You also need to realize everything has a limit. I do not have supper human abilities  just normal ones. Size does matter, you can not change the laws of physics.  Forget all that chi crap you see and tricks on youtube this is reality. But an Untrained person would not be able to hold a 300+ lbs man..


----------



## geezer (Sep 29, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Structure does work I just proved it. You also need to realize everything has a limit. I do not have supper human abilities  just normal ones. Size does matter  ...an Untrained person would not be able to hold a 300+ lbs man..



Why _should_ you have to oppose such a great force? In my lineage, we yield before superior force. "Structure" is not rigidity.... it is just maintaining kinetic linkages, body alignment and proper positioning so that you can easily bend or move to dissolve such heavy force. Trying to stand your ground in front of vastly greater power is a fool's errand.


----------



## Danny T (Sep 29, 2015)

Geezer, we also test the ability to hold pressure with structure however, that isn't what we do with the pressure in reality. Just shows how one can relax yet maintain. We bent or blend to dissolve but it is awesome to see someone who is relaxed yet unmoved by the pressure. It one can maintain one can direct the force to where ever one wants.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 30, 2015)

geezer said:


> Why _should_ you have to oppose such a great force? In my lineage, we yield before superior force. "Structure" is not rigidity.... it is just maintaining kinetic linkages, body alignment and proper positioning so that you can easily bend or move to dissolve such heavy force. Trying to stand your ground in front of vastly greater power is a fool's errand.



Testing one root is very traditional training nothing new .


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 30, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> It seems my understanding of structure is different.



What is your understanding of structure


----------



## geezer (Sep 30, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Testing one root is very traditional training nothing new .



Yes, and we also "test" structure. My point was actually in agreement with your response to JP when you commented about there being physical limits. Working with somebody who is that much bigger, you better be able to flex or yield and redirect the force or you will get crushed. 

BTW, Futsao, from the previous videos you look like a big guy, I'm guessing 6' or 6'1" and 225lbs. And that guy you are working with looks at least 6'5" and 350LBS. or bigger. We've got a guy almost that big in our DTE group. We call him "Tiny". He's probably 6'3" and 280. A little fat, to be sure,  but strong, fast and skilled. Now I'm 5'8', a little fat myself  , and when I work with him....  well, ...basically I'm screwed! Good thing he's a nice guy.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 30, 2015)

geezer said:


> Why _should_ you have to oppose such a great force? In my lineage, we yield before superior force...


Agree! When a force comes toward you, you can

1. resist against it. This is force against force.
2. yield into it, This is too conservative. You just can't "keep yielding"
3. borrow the force and take advantage on it. This will give you permanent solution.

IMO, 3 > 2 > 1.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 30, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> What is your understanding of structure


In stead of testing your opponent's "pushing", what method will you use to test your opponent's "pulling"? Should you also need to have strong rooting and body structure to be able to against your opponent's "pulling"?


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 30, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In stead of testing your opponent's "pushing", what method will you use to test your opponent's "pulling"? Should you also need to have strong rooting and body structure to be able to against your opponent's "pulling"?


Pushing pulling no difference..rooting is rooting..


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 30, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Pushing pulling no difference..rooting is rooting..


Disagree!

When your opponent

- "pushes" you, you can transfer that force down to your back leg and into the ground.
- "pulls" you, since you can't transfer that force down to the ground, what will you do?

This is why we can find so many "group pushing" demo. But we can't find even one "group pulling" demo. Why?


----------



## futsaowingchun (Sep 30, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Disagree!
> 
> When your opponent
> 
> ...


Of course it's the same. What makes you think I can't root myself...it's very easy..you have to change stance..that's the answer..like the low horse


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 1, 2015)

geezer said:


> Yes, and we also "test" structure. My point was actually in agreement with your response to JP when you commented about there being physical limits. Working with somebody who is that much bigger, you better be able to flex or yield and redirect the force or you will get crushed.
> 
> BTW, Futsao, from the previous videos you look like a big guy, I'm guessing 6' or 6'1" and 225lbs. And that guy you are working with looks at least 6'5" and 350LBS. or bigger. We've got a guy almost that big in our DTE group. We call him "Tiny". He's probably 6'3" and 280. A little fat, to be sure,  but strong, fast and skilled. Now I'm 5'8', a little fat myself  , and when I work with him....  well, ...basically I'm screwed! Good thing he's a nice guy.



I'm 6ft not sure sure my weight..I don't want to know. Haha..but it's up there..that guy id like 6'5" over 300 lbs easy. I think problem more like 400lbs.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 1, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Of course it's the same. What makes you think I can't root myself...it's very easy..you have to change stance..that's the answer..like the low horse


Yea...
We practice maintaining our root with pressure from the front, the sides, and the back being pushed and being pulled. The body mechanics of maintaining the root within the body is different but is certainly possible. Easy even once one knows what to do and when.


----------



## geezer (Oct 1, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Disagree!
> 
> When your opponent
> 
> ...



Good point, John. So simple and obvious, yet so many don't get it.

In our WC when _pushed_, we can deflect and redirect, or root and absorb, directing the force into the ground ...as you pointed out.

When pulled, we go forward with the force, using it against our opponent. Consequently, we make it a habit of avoiding pulling so our opponent won't return the favor.

@Futsao: If, as we do, you maintain forward pressure, why would you drop into a low horse and resist a pull, even if you can? _When the way is free, go forwards!
_
Check out the examples in the video below:
Deflecting/evading a push 8:38
Going with and using  a pull 8:48


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 1, 2015)

geezer said:


> Good point, John. So simple and obvious, yet so many don't get it.
> 
> In our WC when _pushed_, we can deflect and redirect, or root and absorb, directing the force into the ground ...as you pointed out.
> 
> ...


The answer is simple it's up to me what I want to do. There are options to be made..


----------



## geezer (Oct 1, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> The answer is simple it's up to me what I want to do. There are options to be made..



Sure. Totally your choice. But if you hold fast against a pull, you will be _pulling back_. I prefer not to pull back. I'd rather maintain forward pressure. That's a core principle of both my Wing Chun and the Escrima I train.


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 1, 2015)

That's correct geezer, this is a core principle of_ all _good WC. In WC we don't resist/fight force with force. We don't hold static postures resisting our opponent's pressing forces, no do we try to hold our position rigidly resisting our opponent's pull.
This is covered by Loi Lau Hoi Sung, Lat Sau Jik Chung, as well as WC's maximum efficiency principles.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 1, 2015)

geezer said:


> Sure. Totally your choice. But if you hold fast against a pull, you will be _pulling back_. I prefer not to pull back. I'd rather maintain forward pressure. That's a core principle of both my Wing Chun and the Escrima I train.



Not everything is about forward pressure I think wing chuners get to carried away with this. Even forward pressure can be used agaisnt you. I preferr to use a more dynamic approach. You say you using yielding in your wing chun..how can you yield if your always using forward pressure seems like a contradiction. .


----------



## geezer (Oct 1, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> ..how can you yield if your always using forward pressure seems like a contradiction. .



_Not_ a contradiction. You press forward like a spring. If you meet greater force, you bend or compress before it, yielding without ever abandoning your own forward pressure. Then as the opposing pressure abates or is "dissolved",  you are free to spring forward. That is _Loi lau hoi sung, lat sau jik chung _in application.


----------



## Jake104 (Oct 1, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Not everything is about forward pressure I think wing


Yes it is!

Forward pressure/intent doesn't necessarily mean moving forward. It means having an intent that never goes away. It is always there regardless of if you're jamming redirecting or even retreating. In good Martial arts that is.


----------



## Jake104 (Oct 1, 2015)

geezer said:


> _Not_ a contradiction. You press forward like a spring. If you meet greater force, you bend or compress before it, yielding without ever abandoning your own forward pressure. Then as the opposing pressure abates or is "dissolved",  you are free to spring forward. That is _Loi lau hoi sung, lat sau jik chung _in application.


I agree, but I'll take it a step further. Forward intent is there even before contact. In good MA's


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 1, 2015)

Fwd intent/fwd pressure/fwd whatever - while this is about having a fwd nature in the elbow, I look at it as a step further by always looking to have a fwd 'connection' thru the bridge to my opponent's COG - even if the bridge point isn't exactly 'on center' between my opponent and I. This includes times where I must absorb, deflect, redirect, etc, say when operating under 4 gate principles and taking an attack out to the corner of a gate because I wasn't able to deal with the pressure on centerline. 
If I don't have that fwd 'presence', I can't link/connect with their COG and cannot reliably react in time to their next move_ by touch_. Without that, one starts relying on tricks and speed to compensate. That's a very low lever of WC imo

Proper WC Structure is a means of supporting this action without giving up my own personal space or needing to rely on too much stength.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 1, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Yes it is!
> 
> Forward pressure/intent doesn't necessarily mean moving forward. It means having an intent that never goes away. It is always there regardless of if you're jamming redirecting or even retreating. In good Martial arts that is.



FORWARD means forward...that is one direction so your wrong


----------



## geezer (Oct 1, 2015)

Just for the record: Jake, JP, and I may all live in Arizona, but we come from three different WC backgrounds. So if we all strongly agree on this _forward intent_ thing, we might be on to something . ...Or maybe we've all just been under the hot AZ sun too long? ...it's already October and it was still *106* today.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 1, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> FORWARD means forward...that is one direction so your wrong


One can yield yet maintain a forward pressure or force. One can even step backward and still have a forward pressure/force.


----------



## geezer (Oct 2, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Not everything is about forward pressure.



OK... *Jake* (Leung Sheung? and DTE), *JP* (HFY and Moy Yat?), and _*I*_ (WT- VT and some DTE) represent three separate lineages,  ...we all live in Arizona, and we disagree. Forward intent, and it's application, forward pressure are really important to each of us in our WC.

Let's ask _*Joy*_ (Vajramusdi) what he thinks. He is from yet _another_ lineage (Ho Kam Ming - Augustin Fong) and lives in Arizona too. Also he's the most senior WC practitioner I know. _Can this be the topic that unites WC in AZ?_ Let's find out!  


@Futsao: BTW, there are times when I do tug or pull on my opponent, but when I do I try not to retract force back towards myself. Instead it's like using a lap or jut, sometimes with a turn, to cause your opponent to jerk forward without actually withdrawing energy back towards your body. It's easy to demonstrate, but hard to describe. For those who are familiar with the system, *WT* teaches this early on in the "1st Section of Chi Sau".

Check out how LT creates this effect of jolting his opponent forward without pulling-in or withdrawing energy at about 2:20 -3:30 in the clip below:






_Achulee, I tell you the true... It is not pull ...it is pooosh!_ 

Also, notice that after the initial instruction, he also demos on some really big guys. Always demo on the big guys!


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 2, 2015)

Actually, it is pretty easy to demonstrate. If you are changing the line/moving the bridge and your elbow collapses and/or you pull them into your 'box'/personal space, then you don't have proper fwd intent - not to mention not much understanding of WC's ideas of space, structure or ranges. WC structure doesn't really exist or have much meaning _without_ FWD intent.

The reason 3 people from separate lineages all agree on this is because this is all basic, common-knowledge WC principle. Without this basic understanding of structure & energetics, one could seriously question if someone is really doing WC at all.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 2, 2015)

geezer said:


> OK... *Jake* (Leung Sheung? and DTE), *JP* (HFY and Moy Yat?), and _*I*_ (WT- VT and some DTE) represent three separate lineages,  ...we all live in Arizona, and we disagree. Forward intent, and it's application, forward pressure are really important to each of us in our WC.
> 
> Let's ask _*Joy*_ (Vajramusdi) what he thinks. He is from yet _another_ lineage (Ho Kam Ming - Augustin Fong) and lives in Arizona too. Also he's the most senior WC practitioner I know. _Can this be the topic that unites WC in AZ?_ Let's find out!
> 
> ...


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hands, elbows,knees-,eyes  coordinated --all point forward towards the target,
WC101


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 2, 2015)

pushing / pulling / yin / yang = power generation.
If I pull while my other arm / leg strikes...it has an amplifying effect.

Personally, I don't do all these "structure tests" that you guys apparently do. I don't see the relevance. But, a good topic of discussion regardless. Carry on gents...


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 2, 2015)

I hear ya wck, and agree! But there are different ways to pull. You can pull diagonally or 'across' lines while still maintaining fwd pressure on the bridge w/connection to your opponent _without _pulling someone into your own personal space and giving up your structure.


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 2, 2015)

JPinAZ said:


> I hear ya wck, and agree! But there are different ways to pull. You can pull diagonally or 'across' lines while still maintaining fwd pressure on the bridge w/connection to your opponent _without _pulling someone into your own personal space and giving up your structure.



Yep...exactly. I agree!!! Sorry for not being clear. WC'er's that pull into their own kill zone are asking for it. Not very smart. I've seen photo's of yip chun and yip ching and some in their line do this. Not advisable!
Thx jp


----------



## Danny T (Oct 13, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> FORWARD means forward...that is one direction so your wrong


Interesting... Have you never turned with ones punch or push (yield) while dispersing with a taun maintain with the elbow (fwd from your core) and delivering a punch again driven fwd from your core with the elbow?  I am very confident in that you have. 
Yielding yet with forward pressure with the elbows and with the punch.

Have you never stepped in a rearward direction (angling preferred) and pushed forward while turning? Have you not done this in Chum Kiu and in Bil Jee? If not then you really should revisit and look hard at the turns within them.


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 13, 2015)

After watching many of futsau's clips he's shared on various forums, he does a lot of grabbing and pulling into his space as well as collapsing structure. And maybe that's his idea of WC. But I'm not so sure he understands fwd pressure/intent/etc as most good WC linages view this common/basic principle. 
Funny to then hear him tell someone else 'they are wrong'..


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 13, 2015)

wckf92 said:


> If I pull while my other arm / leg strikes...it has an amplifying effect.


Agree! The "head on collision" is perfect for the striking model.







In striking:

you move forward + your opponent moves forward  (A + B > A) >
you move forward + your opponent is not moving (A + 0 = A) >
you move forward + your opponent moves backward (A - B < A)


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 13, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! The "head on collision" is perfect for the striking model.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



while I "kind of" agree...I completely disagree with your two photo's... only a fool would do this


----------



## Phobius (Oct 14, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! The "head on collision" is perfect for the striking model.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don´t forget two things, in above scenario neither car comes out a winner.

And things get worse if the thing approaching you is not a car but a large truck.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 14, 2015)

Phobius said:


> Don´t forget two things, in above scenario neither car comes out a winner.
> 
> And things get worse if the thing approaching you is not a car but a large truck.


It depends on which part of your body meets with which part of your opponent's body. If your fist meets with your opponent's face, it will be to your advantage.


----------

