# We cant be taken to the ground



## dosk3n (Jul 11, 2010)

Im sure youve heard people mention it before. They practice Chun fu and when asked about ground fighting they defend by saying they cant be taken to the ground.

We all know this isnt really true.

I like the saying the fight starts standing up, keep it there - the fight ends on the ground, take it there.

Im wondering what techniques you practice to keep it standing up?

Dean.


----------



## mook jong man (Jul 11, 2010)

People who believe they can't end up on the floor probably also believe that Paris Hilton is a virgin or maybe Lindsay Lohan will one day become a teetotaler.

We practice a variety of different drills for dealing with vertical grappling and on the ground.

These can be anything from the standard wrestling pummeling drills to  takedowns and trips from different types of clinch positions , close range striking from clinch positions , eye gouges and face controls , low kicks , knees to the thighs , foot stomps etc.

Against an attempted clinch we will use Wing Chun but if the person puts their head down and changes levels then we will change levels too and deliver an upward elbow to the face .

The further his head and posture  goes down then the  less striking options there will be available to you , as to raise a knee to his face could result in your leg being under hooked and you thrown on your ****.

So in the first instance we might sprawl depending on how hard and low he is coming in or we might opt  to control his head and lead his face down into the concrete or eye rake his face from underneath.

Other things we do are to guide his head down into our chest , get the double underhooks and put pressure on his neck or usually just apply a guillotine choke.

We like to practice all this stuff from chi sau as well so that we can try and detect the attempted shoot or tackle before it has even begun and nip it in the bud.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 11, 2010)

dosk3n said:


> Im sure youve heard people mention it before. They practice Chun fu and when asked about ground fighting they defend by saying they cant be taken to the ground.



Well, it is quite obvious I am not as well versed as those persons are in my training. I am just beginning to feel my body start to levitate after all these years of study and training. I have started to really work hard on my forms spending several hours each day and believe I feel the difference already. I should soon be unable to be taken down. Training is wonderful. 

Did some more training today only this time I did it with a training partner who worked with me slowly increasing the speed of his take-down attempts and the amount of pressure he applied. I actually felt I was levitating a couple of times and would not be able to be taken down but upon reflection realized he was picking me up and dumping me. I was not levitating at all! Oh the pain and discomfort of it all! Oh well back to working the forms; Again!


----------



## geezer (Jul 11, 2010)

This is an interesting area to consider. Different groups approach this problem differently. Some clubs persist in believing that if your stand-up game is good enough, that's all you need. On the other extreme, some totally embrace grappling, train their own brand of grappling and take on the grapplers at their own game. I take a middle of the road approach and favor the use of a well tested "anti-grappling" curriculum. Now before some of you get all high and mighty on the subject, _let me clarify_.

By an "anti-grappling" approach, I mean developing strategies to deal with a grappling attack and get back to your best game, rather than fight the other guy's game. So you need to work clinches, learn to counter takedowns, and if you go down, you need to learn how to fall, how to avoid and escape mounts, and how to bring it back to your punching game whether on your feet or on the ground. Basically, I think this is what Mook was saying too. 

It's the same strategy _any_ fighter uses. You learn to bring it back to your best range. Yesterday I was training with a Tibetan White Crane stylist. I'd close on him to get to my strongest range, while he kept evading, keeping distance so he could play to his long-bridge game. It's the same for kickers versus boxers. You don't want to confront the other guy on his terms, so you need to know what to do when you get out of your range so you can _recover_. That's all "anti-grappling" is for WC. It is not the same as a fully developed grappling art.

Now, that said, I have nothing against cross-training. And if you really want to take on a grappler on his own terms, great... start studying a good grappling art. Kamon Guy, for example, studies BJJ. Sounds good to me. But I see that as beyond the scope of WC. IMO, modern, _evolving_ WC needs to confront the reality of today's fighting styles, but it should still focus on what WC does best and not try to be all things to all people.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jul 11, 2010)

*Sigh* and here I thought we'd finally slain the "Style loyalty" monster.....


----------



## yak sao (Jul 11, 2010)

I don't see it as style loyalty, rather taking one style of fighting and honing it to a fine edge so that you are confident in your abilities when confronted.
As Geezer stated so eloquently, WC's anti grappling is our way of getting back to what we do best.
I think cross training is fantastic. If I had the time I would learn a half dozen systems..... but I don't. I live in the 21st century (man that still soumds weird to me) and there are a multitude of distractions. I'm married, have 2 kids and then there's that whole pesky job thing.
 My best shot at being a formidable fighter, given my circumstances is to take something and learn it really well, knowing that when I go into a self defense situation, what I do will have very few exceptions.
Does this mean I think I'm invincible? By no means, but it does give me a sense of peace. More than taking the cherry picking approach: a little of this style, a little of that style....
Doesn't it seem more logical to take your strength and develop it to a higher level, than to take a weakness, let's say grappling, and spend an hour, 3 times a week training it, only to be confronted by someone who is a grappling machine who trains it 3 hours a day, every day, and then try to beat him at his game?


----------



## geezer (Jul 11, 2010)

yak sao said:


> Doesn't it seem more logical to take your strength and develop it to a higher level, than to take a weakness, let's say grappling, and spend an hour, 3 times a week training it, only to be confronted by someone who is a grappling machine who trains it 3 hours a day, every day, and then try to beat him at his game?



Good point. But I don't think Andy was arguing with that. I thought he was referring to those whose "style loyalty" blinds them to the weaknesses of whatever their particular style may be. If you don't know your own vulnerabilities, better hope the other guy doesn't find them first!

And as for killing "monsters". Believe it or not, I actually did a college paper on this! Ah college back in the 70's. Anyway, part of what defines a "monster" is that it is really _hard to kill_. And just when you think you've finally finished it for good, it pops back to life and comes at you again!


----------



## Thesemindz (Jul 11, 2010)

yak sao said:


> Doesn't it seem more logical to take your strength and develop it to a higher level, than to take a weakness, let's say grappling, and spend an hour, 3 times a week training it, only to be confronted by someone who is a grappling machine who trains it 3 hours a day, every day, and then try to beat him at his game?


 
I agree with this point. But I don't think you _can_ be your best if you haven't tested what _you do_ against a variety of resisting attacks, including grappling attacks.

Yes, you can become a stand up striking machine, and box any grappler into submission, but you have to train against dedicated expert grappling attacks in order for that to happen. I'm not going to learn to kill sharks by fighting lions.

I prefer to find out what I'm best at at every range and then work on _those_ techniques. That way I have a plan whether I'm on my feet or on my back.


-Rob


----------



## yak sao (Jul 11, 2010)

Thesemindz said:


> I agree with this point. But I don't think you _can_ be your best if you haven't tested what _you do_ against a variety of resisting attacks, including grappling attacks.
> 
> Yes, you can become a stand up striking machine, and box any grappler into submission, but you have to train against dedicated expert grappling attacks in order for that to happen. I'm not going to learn to kill sharks by fighting lions.
> 
> ...


 

No argument from me......better to test your abilities against someone who knows what they're doing, than someone simply playing a role.
I have a buddy who was a golden glove boxer. You can bet when I tried out my WT vs him, it wasn't exactly play time.


----------



## SensibleManiac (Jul 11, 2010)

Master the clinch, takedown counters and escapes on the ground from the basic positions and you're being realistic in your avoidance of grappling, anything else is denial.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 11, 2010)

The devil in the details.The stance that I use and teach is both very stable and yet very mobile. It takes a lot of practice and correction. I work on maintaining my platform and destabilizing the other person's platform. You might get a sense of what I mean in my second article for The Journal of Asian Martial Art(JAMA).The article and the accompanying pictures are on my website at <www.tempewingchun.com>
Of course it's possible to be taken down... one must try to spin away and get up.In the worst possible scenario with good training it's still possible to defend oneself with elbow and knee control and knowing your center of gravity and learning how to adjust to the forces at hand while still doing wing chun. I have played my wing chun game against top quality wrestlers, jj people and boxers.I do work on what to do if taken down but spend much more time in developing a wing chun game- even against being taken down.
The key is getting a top quality teacher who knows the art, is experienced and knows how to train individuals.
I have nothing against people wanting to learn, wrestling or jj in addition to wing chun. I just haven't needed to and the same is the case for many of my kung fu brothers/sisters in Tucson and my best students in Tempe or elsewhere..

joy chaudhuri


----------



## geezer (Jul 12, 2010)

_Caltrops!_

Yes, it just hit me that the whole solution to this grappling, wrestling, BJJ mania is to carry huge bags of caltrops --you know, those spiky ninja things like oversize "jacks"-- wherever you go. Or anything else really bumpy and sharp. Broken glass bottles, etc.  I got the idea when I went back to the city park where I used to practice and they had ripped up some of the nice grass where we trained and replaced it with rough rock landscaping using jagged, fist size pieces of broken granite. You could barely walk on the stuff with hard shoes. Nobody in their right mind would even consider rolling on that! 

So next time somebody says,_ "What do you do against a grappler who takes it to the ground?_", just dump out your bag of caltrops and say, _"You want to go to the ground? Be my guest... after you."_ 

Man, I really should write more posts like this late at night. I never get ideas like this at normal hours.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 12, 2010)

geezer said:


> Good point. But I don't think Andy was arguing with that. I thought he was referring to those whose "style loyalty" blinds them to the weaknesses of whatever their particular style may be. If you don't know your own vulnerabilities, better hope the other guy doesn't find them first!
> 
> And as for killing "monsters". Believe it or not, I actually did a college paper on this! Ah college back in the 70's. Anyway, part of what defines a "monster" is that it is really _hard to kill_.* And just when you think you've finally finished it for good, it pops back to life and comes at you again![/*quote]
> 
> ...


----------



## hunt1 (Jul 12, 2010)

First rule. Everyone can be taken down.

 Second rule You need dynamic body usage to prevent take downs by skilled people.

 For the common double leg shoot the basic lines of wrestling defense are head first hands second legs via sprawl third. Adopt your wing chun usage to these three lines  and life vs takedowns gets much easier.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Jul 20, 2010)

It is very important to talk about this point as there are many martial artists (not just chunners) who insist that they will never get taken to the floor

I have seen in person, certain individuals who are almost impossible to get to the floor. These guys have usually been half my bodyweight and have allowed me to deploy any techniques I wish to get them down. These all failed. Yet, in spite of this, those same martial artists have admitted very freely that there will be times when they will get taken down. 

We have to imagine all kinds of scenarios in the fighting world. There is the competition type of fighting, where two guys come from separate corners of the mat/ring/cage knowing full well that they are going to be attacked. However, what a lot of people forget that in the real world, there are times when fights happen spontaneously. Some people are mugged from behind. Some people are pushed up against a car bonnet. Some people are grabbed randomly. This means that those people who practice never getting taken down are caught off guard

This means that there is a need for overall strategies. Try to keep your feet, but if you get taken down, have an ace up your sleeve

In Kamon we practice a lot of takedown defences, as well as working from the floor in a realistic fashion. We are encouraged to learn BJJ (in seminars etc), but in actual Kamon classes we use more wing chun to improve our core concepts

I would love to meet up with some chunners (especially the guys on here that I have come to respect over the years) to go through some of this stuff as I know some wing chun schools dont cover it at all


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 21, 2010)

dosk3n said:


> Im sure youve heard people mention it before. They practice Chun fu and when asked about ground fighting they defend by saying they cant be taken to the ground.
> 
> We all know this isnt really true.
> 
> ...


 
Bottom line: If you want to ensure you can defend yourself on the ground, you better train for it. 

In our curriculum we have "recovery" techniques we practice. 

Those are tech's where you're taken down and the focus is on dealing with the takedown and then recovering your footing. 

Drills we practice include sprawl drills, and techniques involving sweeps where the focus is getting an attacker off of you so that you can get back up to your feet. (Elevator sweeps, scissor sweeps, etc...) 

A well rounded fighter will train in all ranges of combat... including the ground.


----------



## Rion (Jul 26, 2010)

My Sifu always said that if it works it`s wing chun,and that wing chun is about keeping it simple whats more simple than that.


----------



## Bluesman (Nov 21, 2015)

Just go do a year of Judo!! You don't even have to grade. Just a bit of full contact randori, learn some throws, throw defense, sweeps & ground fighting!! That should give you most of what you need to complement your existing style!


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 22, 2015)

Just a basic horse stance seems to keep me from being on the ground most of the times.  I say most of the times because there are times where it takes less energy to roll someone over than to try to remain standing.  Staying off the ground for my school is more of a recommendation than a solid rule.  I do kung fu and some of the forms have techniques that require the student to be on the ground in order to pull it off.   The only solid rule, for us, about being on the ground is to not be on the ground for long.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 22, 2015)

dosk3n said:


> what techniques you practice to keep it standing up?


Don't let your opponent to get both of your legs.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 22, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Don't let your opponent to get both of your legs.



Lol.

The best way to defend against double underhooks is not to let them get double underhooks.

Otherwise there are now a few systems that focus on defending grappling by standing up.


----------



## guy b. (Nov 22, 2015)

geezer said:


> This is an interesting area to consider. Different groups approach this problem differently. Some clubs persist in believing that if your stand-up game is good enough, that's all you need. On the other extreme, some totally embrace grappling, train their own brand of grappling and take on the grapplers at their own game. I take a middle of the road approach and favor the use of a well tested "anti-grappling" curriculum. Now before some of you get all high and mighty on the subject, _let me clarify_.



I think all of these approaches are mistaken. Wing chun is what it is and I don't think you should attempt to change it by introducing grappling. Likewise it is foolish to believe that grappling will never happen. It can and does happen often in real fights. 

The best approach is to learn grappling properly. For wing chun the best addition is bjj, because standing grappling which might interfere with the standing approach of wing chun, is not emphasised. Judo also integrates reasonably well because it is a leg and hip grappling approach which doesn't involve excessive upper body postural change. However any standup grappling is contrary to the wing chun approach if not treated very carefully.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 22, 2015)

Standing grappling is contrary to standing striking.  Think muay thai and judo. 

If i was to adopt a judo position in a clinch with far hips i would get kneed apart.  But to defend the knee by going close hips.  I am set up to be judo thrown.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 22, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The best way to defend against double underhooks is not to let them get double underhooks.


The best way to avoid under hook is to raise your arm straight up. But since this is a WC thread, all the anti-clinch suggestion may be considered as "not pure WC".


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 22, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The best way to avoid under hook is to raise your arm straight up. But since this is a WC thread, all the anti-clinch suggestion may be considered as "not pure WC".


Very true.  In that case I wouldn't know what the  "WC solution" would be.  I don't take it, and I've never seen any of their guys use a "WC solution" successfully against a take down in competitions.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 22, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The best way to avoid under hook is to raise your arm straight up. But since this is a WC thread, all the anti-clinch suggestion may be considered as "not pure WC".



If we get caught in an undertook. We chop the throat. Wizzer and re feed an arm. Which you could probably squeeze into chun if you squinted.

I saw a demo once where a cross face was something sau.


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 22, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Don't let your opponent to get both of your legs.



Greco-Roman Wrestling doesn't allow grabbing the legs at all and people that have spent their entire lives training to not get taken down still do in it.  Judo no longer allows double leg attacks and people still fall down.  Single leg attacks are more common then double leg attacks in freestyle wrestling.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 22, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The best way to avoid under hook is to raise your arm straight up. But since this is a WC thread, all the anti-clinch suggestion may be considered as "not pure WC".


So in Wing Chun we do Poon Sao (rolling hands)? So you got two guys doing a drill with both arms connected and rolling back and forth? They're in a somewhat close range kind of in and out of striking and clinch range? So maybe a half step in, is clinch range, and a half step out is striking range? So, why in world would WC focus and train in such a way if its goal was to avoid the clinch? Why would we even consider calling WC a close range combat system if it refuses to deal with the "clinch" or takedowns? What do we think happens in close range? I'm going to out on a limb here, and I'm going to say in close range the clinch and grappling happens? So is WC a close range art or not? Maybe it's a close quarters art? Like phone booths and bathroom stalls? Gee I wonder what the WC solution might be?


----------



## guy b. (Nov 22, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Standing grappling is contrary to standing striking.  Think muay thai and judo.
> 
> If i was to adopt a judo position in a clinch with far hips i would get kneed apart.  But to defend the knee by going close hips.  I am set up to be judo thrown.



Depends on the standing striking approach. Muay thai doesn't go well with judo. Wing chun does go reasonably well. 

Judo is not necessarily far hips. Someone desperate not to be judo thrown stands far hips.


----------



## yak sao (Nov 22, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Maybe it's a close quarters art? Like phone booths and bathroom stalls? Gee I wonder what the WC solution might be?



Oh wow!!!! That's it!!!!!  WC  is short for Water Closet.....it all makes sense now


----------



## Marnetmar (Nov 22, 2015)

All WCers can be taken to the ground except me because I'm Abe Lincoln and am an incredibly heavy marble sculpture that may or may not be bolted into the ground. This is me after winning my first fight around 1865:







I welcome any and all challengers at any time. I'm located in Washington, DC. Do your worst, grapplers!


----------



## drop bear (Nov 23, 2015)

Marnetmar said:


> All WCers can be taken to the ground except me because I'm Abe Lincoln and am an incredibly heavy marble sculpture that may or may not be bolted into the ground. This is me after winning my first fight around 1865:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would but I owe the guy for beating all those vampires.


----------



## yak sao (Nov 23, 2015)

I didn't know Honest Abe was a WC man. I learn so much on this forum.
But did you know that he was a very skilled wrestler? He had a record of something like 300 and 1


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 23, 2015)

yak sao said:


> Oh wow!!!! That's it!!!!!  WC  is short for Water Closet.....it all makes sense now


I have had some tough battles in the Water Closet. Usually it's issue with maintaining my center line. But sometimes it's too much forward or I mean rearward energy and I blow through the opponent and hit the backboard. I always win cause I'm a close quarters expert...I think I need to eat more fiber?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 23, 2015)

drop bear said:


> If we get caught in an undertook. We chop the throat. Wizzer and re feed an arm. Which you could probably squeeze into chun if you squinted.


IMO, when your opponent uses "under hook" to press down your shoulder, your other hand may not be able to reach to his body. So you should train how to use the same arm to deal with your opponent under hook arm.

The best way to deal with an

- under hook is to use over hook to "crack" on your opponent's elbow joint.
- over hook is to use under hook to "press" down on your opponent's shoulder joint.


----------



## yak sao (Nov 23, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I have had some tough battles in the Water Closet. Usually it's issue with maintaining my center line. But sometimes it's too much forward or I mean rearward energy and I blow through the opponent and hit the backboard. I always win cause I'm a close quarters expert...I think I need to eat more fiber?



I don't know, but after that post I sure don't want to grapple with you


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 23, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, when your opponent uses "under hook" to press down your shoulder, your other hand may not be able to reach to his body. So you should train how to use the same arm to deal with your opponent under hook arm.
> 
> The best way to deal with an
> 
> ...


 

That's not how under hooks work... If someone is using a under hook to press down on your shoulder they likely don't know what they are doing. 

There is only one way to train against under hooks, and that is to use them and train with people that know how to use them. And most importantly do it live


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 24, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, when your opponent uses "under hook" to press down your shoulder, your other hand may not be able to reach to his body. So you should train how to use the same arm to deal with your opponent under hook arm.
> 
> The best way to deal with an
> 
> ...


Yup! If underhooked, a simple elbow down overhook (since you're already in that position by default) as my teachers call it with "pocketing". Which is trapping the opponents arm with an overhook and dropping hand to pocket and a simple turn will hyperextend or possibly break arm. At the least, you'll have control and opponent off balance weighted and readied to be thrown.

The chop to the neck may not happen if the opponent is already transitioning underhook into throw or takedown. Chances are underhook is setting up one or the other? And.......... For those whoooo...... Might say that's not WC. Dropping the arm being attacked is quicker and more efficient then using the other hand? Why? Cause, When underhook happens you're being set up and most likely you're being uprooted and, or hip spine alignment is broken? So your move is first to maintain your structure or position to throw a half way decent strike to the throat? Well, that's your move. By then the underhooker has already made two-three moves and your face is planted nicely on the concrete? So too late! So I'm saying if I get underhooked I attack right away with what I described earlier in this post.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 24, 2015)

I'll ad another 2 cents. If I get underhooked cross armed (right arm to right arm) same 'idea' applies but now I have free hand (left) to assist in pushing the hips out from underneath my opponent with my tan Sao, hopefully preventing me from being thrown on my face. Now I have throwers back and I sinch in my choke or heun ma and I have a throw of my own. Cause I have completely collapsed him and he fell into my arms. It's kinda like magic. If WC is direct and efficient, then everybody should agree with this? We attack the attack. Some get it twisted and think this means flowery hand movements? No I attack at contact. Ideally my attack starts immediately once there's a bridge. And I'm not talking techniques here.

Wow. I have good coaches (DTE). I'am amazed I even know this stuff! Just goes to show what good teaching and understanding does! They're miracle workers cause up till this last year I had 0 grappling experience. I'm not even learning 'grappling' technically. But I'll say it again if WC is a close range fighting system it better have these awnsers. Otherwise, well.....just look at the countless YouTube grappler vs Wing Chun videos. Plenty of throat striking going on with not so very good results.


----------



## GiYu - Todd (Nov 25, 2015)

dosk3n said:


> Im sure youve heard people mention it before. They practice Chun fu and when asked about ground fighting they defend by saying they cant be taken to the ground.
> 
> We all know this isnt really true.
> 
> ...


If an art form can keep you from being taken to the ground, why not take one that prevents you from ever being hit and makes you dodge bullets too.  That would be awesome!  

When someone tries to take me down, I widen my base and sink my hips.  I'll also try to get good control of my opponent and keep them off balance so they're less effective.  Of course there's no guarantee... but you can tilt the odd a bit in your favor.

If someone tried to bum-rush you to the ground, having good timing and sidestepping the rush while guiding them past you might be helpful (assuming you see it coming).


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Just a basic horse stance seems to keep me from being on the ground most of the times.  I say most of the times because there are times where it takes less energy to roll someone over than to try to remain standing.  Staying off the ground for my school is more of a recommendation than a solid rule.  I do kung fu and some of the forms have techniques that require the student to be on the ground in order to pull it off.   The only solid rule, for us, about being on the ground is to not be on the ground for long.



Becareful, there's a lot of takedowns that begin when your opponent is in horse stance.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Becareful, there's a lot of takedowns that begin when your opponent is in horse stance.


Agree! If your "horse stance" is:

- "narrow", your opponent will sweep your leg from outside in to make your stance even "narrower".
- "wide", your opponent will spring your leg from inside out to make your stance even "wider".
- "low", your opponent will twist your leg from top down to make your stance even "lower".
- "high", your opponent will horse back kick your leg above your knee to make your stance even "higher".

The 90 degree vertical line toward your horse stance base line will be your weak balance spot. IMO, there exist no perfect stance on earth that can be used to against grappling.

It's the skill that you use for

- mobility footwork,
- prevent from clinch,
- handle with clinch,
- handle with take down,

that can be used to deal with a grappler but not the stance.

For example, in the following picture, the wide horse stance can be used to deal with foot sweep nicely because you have a large base. But if your opponent uses his leg to "spring/kick/hook/pull" your leg from inside out, since your base is too large and you can't make it any larger, you will fall.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Becareful, there's a lot of takedowns that begin when your opponent is in horse stance.


I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have any video of this?  I would like to see for my training purposes.  The horse stance that I take is a low horse stance but not super low like wushu. Similar to this picture but normally a little higher depending on the height of my opponent.  If you don't know of any video then throw out a couple of grappling techniques that one may try on someone in this stance.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> throw out a couple of grappling techniques that one may try on someone in this stance.



Let me try this.

A - person on the left,
B - person on the right,

A can use A's left hand to push on B right elbow joint to across to B's left to jam B's left arm (this is the set up). Depending on B's respond, A can use A's:

- left leg to "sweep" B's right leg (east force),
- right leg to "scoop" B's right leg (west force),
- right leg to "cut" B's right leg (north force),
- right hand to pull behind B's neck and "spin" B (south force). When B steps in B's left leg, A can sweep or hook B's left leg.
- right leg to "block" B's right leg (south force) after A has spun A's left leg.
- ...

Since B's stance will expose "leading leg" to A, A can take advantage and apply many skills.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! If your "horse stance" is:
> 
> - "narrow", your opponent will sweep your leg from outside in to make your stance even "narrower".
> - "wide", your opponent will spring your leg from inside out to make your stance even "wider".
> ...



This is a horrible fighting horse stance.  The horse stance that he's doing is better for training and conditioning the legs.  He couldn't possible move effectively in a stance like that.  I'm not sure how other schools measure out the distance for a horse stance, but in my school this is how we get an idea of how far our legs are supposed to be. 




The only way our horse stance would be that wide is if we did it wrong or had really large feet on a short person


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


>


From the grappling art point of view, the horse stance in this clip is still too wide. IMO, the best width should be your "shoulder width + 2 fists distance". It has nothing to do with MA styles. It's pure science.

When your feet are close and touching together, your base is small and your balance is weak, When you move your feet apart, your base increases and your balance is getting better. After you have reached to the best width, if you move your feet further apart, you base will getting weaker. That best balance spot just happen to be the "shoulder width + 2 fists distance" as shown in the following normal distribution chart.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let me try this.
> 
> A - person on the left,
> B - person on the right,
> ...


I'll test these out. 
The sweep and scoop only works if I'm not paying attention. It does work, I just have it covered. So it doesn't work on me unless I'm daydreaming. There are multiple ways to deal with it either by transitioning into another stance or by moving while in horse

"right hand to pull behind B's neck and "spin" B (south force). When B steps in B's left leg, A can sweep or hook B's left leg."  I don't understand the pull behind B's neck and spin B.  I'm not sure what that would look like.  Any opportunity to sweep my left leg is almost zero when I'm in that stance. He's really far away from my left leg.   I can move in horse without having my left leg come forward.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have any video of this?  I would like to see for my training purposes.  The horse stance that I take is a low horse stance but not super low like wushu. Similar to this picture but normally a little higher depending on the height of my opponent.  If you don't know of any video then throw out a couple of grappling techniques that one may try on someone in this stance.



Well from that position, just about anything except for double leg takedowns, body locks, and guard pulls depending on the skill of the person you're fighting. MMA style single legs and high clinches (muay thai clinch) are just gravy from there, especially if the guy you're fighting has a height and reach advantage.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> From the grappling art point of view, the horse stance in this clip is still too wide. IMO, the best width should be your "shoulder width + 2 fists distance". It has nothing to do with MA styles. It's pure science.
> 
> When your feet are close and touching together, your base is small and your balance is weak, When you move your feet apart, your base increases and your balance is getting better. After you have reached to the best width, if you move your feet further apart, you base will getting weaker. That best balance spot just happen to be the "shoulder width + 2 fists distance" as shown in the following normal distribution chart.


 I can't tell if his stance is too wide or not because I only see feet.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well from that position, just about anything except for double leg takedowns, body locks, and guard pulls depending on the skill of the person you're fighting. MMA style single legs and high clinches (muay thai clinch) are just gravy from there, especially if the guy you're fighting has a height and reach advantage.


 From what I've experience so far, whenever a person reaches over me they be come wide open for a wide range of attacks.  I'll have to find a muay thai fighter to test it out.  We used to have one he was 6ft or taller and whenever I got that low he would kick me and not try to clinch.

Height and reach advantage decreases as punches are aimed downward.  I can probably take off about 5 inches or more  from a person that is 6ft tall just by getting into a lower stance.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> The sweep and scoop only works if I'm not paying attention.


Of course you can bend your leg at you knee joint to escape both foot sweep and scoop. But you are no longer in horse stance any more.



JowGaWolf said:


> "right hand to pull behind B's neck and "spin" B (south force). When B steps in B's left leg, A can sweep or hook B's left leg."  I don't understand the pull behind B's neck and spin B.  I'm not sure what that would look like.  Any opportunity to sweep my left leg is almost zero when I'm in that stance. He's really far away from my left leg.


Since your opponent's back leg is far away from you, you have to either

- attack his leading leg, or
- force him to step in his back leg so you can attack it.

When your use your left hand to push on your opponent's elbow joint to your right, your can use your right hand to pull behind his neck. You step in your left leg, spin your right leg (clockwise - top view). Since your opponent may think that you try to move behind his right side door, he will spin with you and step in his left foot. When he steps in his left leg, that's the time you either sweep his left leg to throw him forward, or hook his left leg to throw him backward.

Here are 2 clips that shows how to pull your opponent's neck, spin him, and force him to step in his left leg.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> From what I've experience so far, whenever a person reaches over me they be come wide open for a wide range of attacks.  I'll have to find a muay thai fighter to test it out.  We used to have one he was 6ft or taller and whenever I got that low he would kick me and not try to clinch.
> 
> Height and reach advantage decreases as punches are aimed downward.  I can probably take off about 5 inches or more  from a person that is 6ft tall just by getting into a lower stance.



Well keep in mind, I'm just talking about takedowns, not the entire process. Obviously in the whole dynamic, you're more than likely going to be dealing with someone using striking to set up a take down.

Here's one with Dan Henderson showing a single leg utilizing a striking set up;






Here's another showing a MT clinch set up off of a jab;






My point is that the stance itself, like all stances, is vulnerable. I think all TMAs could benefit highly by observing how the MMA styles are actively blending striking and grappling together.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Here's another showing a MT clinch set up off of a jab;


This clip further proves that

- One should never withdraw his punching arm without pulling something back.
- A punch can be more than just a punch, it can be a punch followed by a pull.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have any video of this?  I would like to see for my training purposes.  The horse stance that I take is a low horse stance but not super low like wushu. Similar to this picture but normally a little higher depending on the height of my opponent.  If you don't know of any video then throw out a couple of grappling techniques that one may try on someone in this stance.



Ankle pick.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course you can bend your leg at you knee joint to escape both foot sweep and scoop. But you are no longer in horse stance any more.
> 
> 
> Since your opponent's back leg is far away from you, you have to either
> ...


Thanks


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Well keep in mind, I'm just talking about takedowns, not the entire process. Obviously in the whole dynamic, you're more than likely going to be dealing with someone using striking to set up a take down.
> 
> Here's one with Dan Henderson showing a single leg utilizing a striking set up;
> 
> ...


The Dan Henderson one doesn't work well against a low horse stance like that.  We actually drill that one when training. A few guys tried it on me during free sparring and it didn't work for them.  My horse stance actually prevented them from getting that position. There is no waist to grab and grabbing for my feet or leg puts the person at a bad angle for lifting me, as well as leaving his face exposed. You can actually try this without actually having to spar.  Just have someone get in a low fighting horse stance and just by looking you can tell that you'll run into a bunch of fists and elbows before you can get to the waist.

The MT one that looks like a high stance technique.  I'm not sure if he could do the same technique with someone in a low horse stance without making himself vulnerable.  

Send some more suggestions.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Ankle pick.


This one is 50-50 for me. I've seen some that I knew wouldn't work and others I've seen and I was like "yeah I better keep my eye open from that one."  The low horse stance actually allows me to throw punches as low as my angle.  But there was one ankle pick that I saw on youtube where guy was far out and he nailed it perfectly.  The move would have failed if the person would have moved their foot just a few inches back, but he didn't and ended up on the ground.

When the BJJ guy comes.  I'll see if he can do that to me


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> The Dan Henderson one doesn't work well against a low horse stance like that.


IMO, the following "single leg" method is easier.

- You don't have to get down that low.
- You can use your lower arm to jam his upper arm to disable his leading arm function.

There are more than

- 12 different ways to get "single leg", and
- 8 different ways to take your opponent down after that.

Someone told me there is a book that has 42 different ways to get "single leg". I haven't found that book yet.

In the following clip, his opponent's right hand may be able to hit on his head. If he can attack from the angle while his left foot line up with his opponent's feet, his opponent's free right hand won't be able to reach him. This is the general problem in sport. When striking is not allowed in sport, people don't try to avoid head shot hard enough.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 25, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, the following "single leg" method is easier.
> 
> - You don't have to get down that low.
> - You can use your lower arm to jam his upper arm to disable his leading arm function.
> ...


give me the ones that can be done while being punched at. I tried to look for some and most of them deals will wrestling and grappling sports where punches and kicks can't be done.  I punch and kick out of a horse stance.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 25, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> This one is 50-50 for me. I've seen some that I knew wouldn't work and others I've seen and I was like "yeah I better keep my eye open from that one."  The low horse stance actually allows me to throw punches as low as my angle.  But there was one ankle pick that I saw on youtube where guy was far out and he nailed it perfectly.  The move would have failed if the person would have moved their foot just a few inches back, but he didn't and ended up on the ground.
> 
> When the BJJ guy comes.  I'll see if he can do that to me



Sissor take down.

Thai sweep.




Hip bump or vingativa.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Sissor take down.
> 
> Thai sweep.
> 
> ...


The Thai sweep wouldn't, but the others would anything that lifts my root from behind like that or causes me to bend forward or backward on the stance would break it with no problem.

the sweeps don't work well because I can let my leg flow over the sweep.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 26, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> The Thai sweep wouldn't, but the others would anything that lifts my root from behind like that or causes me to bend forward or backward on the stance would break it with no problem.
> 
> the sweeps don't work well because I can let my leg flow over the sweep.


Part of the skill set for people who are good at that sort of sweep is to either pick a moment when your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way or else to force you into a position where your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way in time.

I'm not very good at those sweeps primarily because I haven't developed that timing, but that's what makes it work for those people who are good at them.

(Actually, the people who are really, really good at those sweeps will get you as you are stepping and your weight is just coming down on your foot. It's not an easy skill to master.)


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 26, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Part of the skill set for people who are good at that sort of sweep is to either pick a moment when your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way or else to force you into a position where your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way in time.


Agree! Timing is important when you apply "sweep". Sometime you may need extra "set up". Here are 2 examples.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 26, 2015)

Sweep is usually trained along with shin bite, scooping kick, and sticky lift. It's 4 in 1 package.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 26, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Part of the skill set for people who are good at that sort of sweep is to either pick a moment when your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way or else to force you into a position where your foot is planted and you can't lift it out of the way in time.
> 
> I'm not very good at those sweeps primarily because I haven't developed that timing, but that's what makes it work for those people who are good at them.
> 
> (Actually, the people who are really, really good at those sweeps will get you as you are stepping and your weight is just coming down on your foot. It's not an easy skill to master.)


Sweeps are my specialty so I'm hyper-sensitive to any opportunities that open up for a sweep. This has also helps with defending against sweeps as well. The best thing about a sweep is that the lower your stance is the less effective and less damaging the sweep will be.  When you see videos of people getting swept it's usually when they are standing tall or in a high stance. Here are a few videos of guys getting laid out by sweeps.  Punches and kicks are awesome but there's nothing in the world that feels like hitting the ground.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 26, 2015)

Sweeps, like throws, work best when foot being swept is weighted like Tony said.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 26, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Sweeps are my specialty so I'm hyper-sensitive to any opportunities that open up for a sweep. This has also helps with defending against sweeps as well. The best thing about a sweep is that the lower your stance is the less effective and less damaging the sweep will be.  When you see videos of people getting swept it's usually when they are standing tall or in a high stance. Here are a few videos of guys getting laid out by sweeps.  Punches and kicks are awesome but there's nothing in the world that feels like hitting the ground.


In the first video guy swept the other guys rear weighted leg. Notice guy in white shirt failed his sweep of front leg which wasn't weighted? Then guy with blue shirt swept weighted leg successfully? Second video is drunken kungfu where these rules may not apply. In Karate Kid 3 Daniel Son received a book on sweeps from Master Terry Silver. All this info is in that book. Tournament guys are suckers for the sweep.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 26, 2015)

Just like throws if I can trap and sweep both legs it's even better. Way more devastating and harder to counter. In other words weight you one way to set up taking both legs the other way.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 26, 2015)

Oh yeah, problem I see with sinking and widening your stance is loosing mobility. In a way you're weighting yourself and making it easier to be taken down. Unless it's a sprawl


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 26, 2015)

See weighted at the :34 mark and again at 2:14. Beautiful throw And mount! Even a 4 year old understands the basics.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 26, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Sweeps are my specialty so I'm hyper-sensitive to any opportunities that open up for a sweep. This has also helps with defending against sweeps as well. The best thing about a sweep is that the lower your stance is the less effective and less damaging the sweep will be.  When you see videos of people getting swept it's usually when they are standing tall or in a high stance. Here are a few videos of guys getting laid out by sweeps.  Punches and kicks are awesome but there's nothing in the world that feels like hitting the ground.



Capoeira has a lot of sweeps because their stance is low.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 26, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Oh yeah, problem I see with sinking and widening your stance is loosing mobility. In a way you're weighting yourself and making it easier to be taken down. Unless it's a sprawl



Aything pulling because if that leg gets shifted the other leg is too far away to take up the balance.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 26, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Sweeps, like throws, work best when foot being swept is weighted like Tony said.


Sweeping the weighted leg is the most common method, not the easiest.  I do both of these sweeps all the time.  If you are walking and I prevent your lead foot from landing to receive the weight then you will fall and it will take less energy and effort to make that happen.   If you are retreating from me and I sweep you so that your feet cannot move backwards then you will fall.  In both cases this occurs because the non-weighted leg can not land.  If I crank the sweep then you will fly. 

It takes less effort and less power to move a leg that's not rooted than it does to move a leg that is rooted.  The only way anyone will know this is if someone tells them or if that person is always doing sweeps and sweeping more than just the weighted leg.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 26, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Sweeps, like throws, work best when foot being swept is weighted like Tony said.


Here's a picture of me sweeping the non rooted leg
From let to right.
Frame 1: The front leg is rooted.
Frame 2: The front leg is no longer rooted (View the shadow differences that the heel makes.
Frame 3: The front leg begins to move at this moment the majority of his weight is on his back leg.
Had I swept his weighted leg his body position would have changed dramatically, but in the photos you can clearly see that it hasn't.  He was actually able to stay rooted on that leg right up until the point that front leg crossed his rooted leg.






Sorry about the bad quality of this next picture (below)
The first picture shows me sweeping his unrooted leg.  He lifts his leg to avoid a low sweep.  In this picture the goal wasn't to seep the rooted leg because it would have caused injury, so I swept the unrooted leg. My opponent was expecting my leg to pass under his in which he could plant the unrooted leg. The problem is he's not able to because I'm redirecting that unrooted leg with my sweep. As you can see he's about to hit the ground and he would have had I actually did the sweep with any force.  The sweep wasn't even fast it was just a tap which was more than enough to disrupt his intentions of planting that foot. 






The majority of the schools if not all of them teach to sweep the rooted leg because it's the easiest to identify and the timing required to sweep the rooted leg is more forgiving.  Sweeping the unrooted leg takes a little more timing because you have such a short window.  You can see me fail at a sweep attempt in the video here at the :027 mark. I tried to knock his leg out of the way right before he plants it.  My timing was off and he was almost able to take me down because if it.  Had I not been as low as I was he would have.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 26, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Aything pulling because if that leg gets shifted the other leg is too far away to take up the balance.


Yes but only if the stance is too wide like what Jake Mace was doing in the picture of him in a super wide horse stance.  
Here are the numerous ways to deal with that. (All will work if the pulling is done with a leg.)
1. lift the front leg 
2. lift the front leg and deliver a front kick
3. lift the front leg and deliver a side kick
4. Shift into cat.
5. Shuffle forward.
6. Jump back
7. Move into bow stance.
8. Pull their leg with your foot right before their foot hooks being your ankle
9. Jump forward with a knee.

Many of these options are only available when in a low stance.  The key is that you have to be aware of what's going on around your feet. None of these will work if you are totally focused on or sensitive to only the action that happens above the waist.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Nov 27, 2015)

Sweeping a leg with at least 50% of your opponent's weight on it is best. WT guys like to keep the weight off the front leg and on their back leg though. Therefore one way to set up a lead leg sweep to be more high percentage is by first trapping / wrapping up their upper body / neck in such a way their weight comes forward and down milliseconds before the sweep. I'll post a video link if I can find a good example.

Another classic is setting up the sweep by circling into their stance, nearly displacing their lead leg with yours while simultaneously stepping on their back foot. Its hard to stay standing up when one leg is being swept and the other is stuck in place. This requires even less actual sweeping of the leg, more force of leverage vs force being used.

Now, when I say "setting up", I don't mean to imply the goal is to set up a sweep or a particular technique. Trying to execute multiple-step maneuvers assuming you aren't going to be countered would be both foolish and bad Wing Chun.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 27, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Sweep is usually trained along with shin bite, scooping kick, and sticky lift. It's 4 in 1 package.



Biting shins would cause all sorts of problems.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2015)

I said it before, and I'll say it again;

If you're worried about the takedown, or you're afraid that you're dead meat once you hit the ground, learn ground fighting and grappling. No stance, no special move, no 300-year old hidden technique is going to stop gravity. 

There's a good reason professional MMA fighters learn ground fighting and grappling ALONG with take down defense.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> Sweeping a leg with at least 50% of your opponent's weight on it is best. WT guys like to keep the weight off the front leg and on their back leg though. Therefore one way to set up a lead leg sweep to be more high percentage is by first trapping / wrapping up their upper body / neck in such a way their weight comes forward and down milliseconds before the sweep. I'll post a video link if I can find a good example.
> 
> Another classic is setting up the sweep by circling into their stance, nearly displacing their lead leg with yours while simultaneously stepping on their back foot. Its hard to stay standing up when one leg is being swept and the other is stuck in place. This requires even less actual sweeping of the leg, more force of leverage vs force being used.
> 
> Now, when I say "setting up", I don't mean to imply the goal is to set up a sweep or a particular technique. Trying to execute multiple-step maneuvers assuming you aren't going to be countered would be both foolish and bad Wing Chun.


I think Wing Chun is limited on the types of sweeps that they do within the system, there are a lot of sweeps that I do that aren't in the Wing Chun fighting system "as far as I can tell"  The higher you stance the more limited you'll be with the types of sweeps that you'll be able to do.  Sweeping a leg with at least 50% of your opponent's weight on it may be the only option because of the structure of the fighting system.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Here's a picture of me sweeping the non rooted leg
> From let to right.
> Frame 1: The front leg is rooted.
> Frame 2: The front leg is no longer rooted (View the shadow differences that the heel makes.
> ...


Sounds like you're saying the probability of sweeping A unrooted leg is less? I like to keep my odds in the higher percentile. In your other post about widening your stance you gave s bunch of different options that might work. But again I prefer doing stuff that's proven and might always work. Look at the 4 year olds in my video. They aren't in a crouching tiger stance. Actually, watch any straight jujitsu tournament they stay pretty upright. My guess is for mobility and not committing there weight one way or the other? They're always trying to sweep each other's legs out. I think there's points for that? Either way same principles apply.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think Wing Chun is limited on the types of sweeps that they do within the system, there are a lot of sweeps that I do that aren't in the Wing Chun fighting system "as far as I can tell"  The higher you stance the more limited you'll be with the types of sweeps that you'll be able to do.  Sweeping a leg with at least 50% of your opponent's weight on it may be the only option because of the structure of the fighting system.


I think you're wrong. If WC is a principle based art... If it's a series of set techniques. Then yes you may be right? But since it's not the latter you're wrong, sorry.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> I said it before, and I'll say it again;
> 
> If you're worried about the takedown, or you're afraid that you're dead meat once you hit the ground, learn ground fighting and grappling. No stance, no special move, no 300-year old hidden technique is going to stop gravity.
> 
> There's a good reason professional MMA fighters learn ground fighting and grappling ALONG with take down defense.


If you're referring to joining a Gracie school you're wrong too. I'm learning within the confines of my system. So sorry you wrong too!

FTW..I'm so not scared of takedowns. If anything I think I like slamming poeple on there head while breaking an arm. It's kinda my new thing lately.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Sounds like you're saying the probability of sweeping A unrooted leg is less? I like to keep my odds in the higher percentile. In your other post about widening your stance you gave s bunch of different options that might work. But again I prefer doing stuff that's proven and might always work. Look at the 4 year olds in my video. They aren't in a crouching tiger stance. Actually, watch any straight jujitsu tournament they stay pretty upright. My guess is for mobility and not committing there weight one way or the other? They're always trying to sweep each other's legs out. I think there's points for that? Either way same principles apply.


No the probability of sweeping the unrooted leg is high.  There are two stages of when this can be done.  
1. When the foot is leaving the ground (really easy)
2. When the foot is about to land on the ground (really difficult)

I can do #1 easy. As long as you are moving, advancing, retreating, evading, then I can land a successful sweep that will put you on your back.
#2 is difficult because I have less time to do this type of sweep.  This sweep requires that I perfectly time it so that it takes away your leg right before you can plant it.

What you do is up to you. I'm not trying to change what works for people.  I'm just informing others because I have actually done the types of sweep that I'm talking about with great success. you can believe what I'm saying or not.  Either way is fine with me.  Just like some people thing that mobility in a horse stance is limited and I know because of my training and sparring that it's only limited if you go to far down like Jake Mace. I've seen beginner students use the horse stance and chance people backwards while in a horse stance.  In my school we move quickly all the time while in horse stance.  Jujitsu sweeps aren't the same as the sweeps that I do.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I think you're wrong. If WC is a principle based art... If it's a series of set techniques. Then yes you may be right? But since it's not the latter you're wrong, sorry.


Easy way to find out. Show me all of the sweeps that are done in Wing Chun


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Show me all of the sweeps that are done in Wing Chun


I would like to see that too.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Easy way to find out. Show me all of the sweeps that are done in Wing Chun


Ok....huh (trying to figure out how I can make this happen ). I guess I can get my selfie stick out and go to town. I'll need a few days. I'll need a haircut and some new Kung Fu pants and borrow a black sash (since if I buy one it will look too new. It has to look worn like I have had a black belt for awhile). I think I can pull this off. I'll keep you posted!


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

Obviously you're stuck in technique and completely ignore my attempts at broadening you're mind. So I feel I'm wasting my time now. Sorry to bad for you You hav the awnsers any who. Why is so important to prove WC does or doesn't have something? Is it to make Jowga that much better? Good luck!


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Easy way to find out. Show me all of the sweeps that are done in Wing Chun



Hmmm...that would be a task for sure. WC has a rich leg arsenal...


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

wckf92 said:


> Hmmm...that would be a task for sure. WC has a rich leg arsenal...


I'm afraid to ask him how many Jowga has? I think he'd probably show us with a series's of vids and suck up all the bandwidth.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

See Wckf92 I think you get it. The possibilities are endless if you're not stuck in  the whole ABC 123 series of techniques? The movements and the idea's behind the movements are where it's at. Problem is getting past the ABC's is impossible for some.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think Wing Chun is limited on the types of sweeps that they do within the system, there are a lot of sweeps that I do that aren't in the Wing Chun fighting system "as far as I can tell"  The higher you stance the more limited you'll be with the types of sweeps that you'll be able to do.  Sweeping a leg with at least 50% of your opponent's weight on it may be the only option because of the structure of the fighting system.



Yeah but having quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences is a different game to being protected from sweeps because of your stance.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I would like to see that too.


i know one sweep I can do many ways. I know one throw I can do many ways. I know one lock I can do many ways. Lucky me?


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> See Wckf92 I think you get it. The possibilities are endless if you're not stuck in  the whole ABC 123 series of techniques? The movements and the idea's behind the movements are where it's at. Problem is getting past the ABC's is impossible for some.



True. I know lots  WC leg movements...and I could dream up lots of situations where I could use them to "sweep". Heck, given the right circumstances, I could "sweep" with my arm. I could sweep you with the long pole.  Any-hoo....hence my point (and yours too apparently).


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but having quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences is a different game to being protected from sweeps because of your stance.


I don't want to rely on either. This is where sensitivity comes into play. Doesn't wrestling use sensitivity? Don't you counter on the transition?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> i know one sweep I can do many ways.


In CMA, there are over 35 different ways to do the "foot sweep". You can almost write a book about it.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In CMA, there are over 35 different ways to do the "foot sweep". You can almost write a book about it.


There is a book. Terry Silvers brought it to Daniel Son to prepare for the tournament in Karate Kid 3

The book can be seen here


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> If you're referring to joining a Gracie school you're wrong too. I'm learning within the confines of my system. So sorry you wrong too!
> 
> FTW..I'm so not scared of takedowns. If anything I think I like slamming poeple on there head while breaking an arm. It's kinda my new thing lately.



So you're slamming people on their head while breaking their arm during training on a regular basis?

Makes one wonder how you're able to maintain so many training partners...


----------



## geezer (Nov 28, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> So you're slamming people on their head while breaking their arm during training on a regular basis?
> 
> Makes one wonder how you're able to maintain so many training partners...



Personally, this latest thing is probably an improvement for ol' Jake. Last time I trained with him he slammed me into a metal picnic table!

...OK fact is it was an accident and I didn't get hurt. Jake's a decent guy, so you can safely assume he's talking about the_ intent _or _potential effect_ of the technique, and not expect to find everyone else at the gym with a bandage on their head and cast on their arm.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I'm afraid to ask him how many Jowga has? I think he'd probably show us with a series's of vids and suck up all the bandwidth.


 There are about 12 unique leg sweeps(thrown differently) that I can think of in Jow Ga and that's based on the empty hand forms that I know.  I don't know if there are more or not.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

wckf92 said:


> True. I know lots  WC leg movements...and I could dream up lots of situations where I could use them to "sweep". Heck, given the right circumstances, I could "sweep" with my arm. I could sweep you with the long pole.  Any-hoo....hence my point (and yours too apparently).


Nope.. I'm only referring to leg sweeps.   I looked for videos of Wing Chung leg sweeps and couldn't find many examples of a wing chun practitioner doing sweeps.  I found tons of videos of kicks to the legs but not many of sweeps


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Obviously you're stuck in technique and completely ignore my attempts at broadening you're mind. So I feel I'm wasting my time now. Sorry to bad for you You hav the awnsers any who. Why is so important to prove WC does or doesn't have something? Is it to make Jowga that much better? Good luck!


1. I never said that Jow Ga is better
2. I only asked a simple question.  How many sweeps does Wing chun have.

The stuff that I said wasn't to make my fighting system sound better.  It was to point out what was possible when others were saying that it's not possible.  For example, based on some of the comments, sweeping the unrooted leg is a foreign concept to some people here.  So I posted pictures of me doing just that.  It wasn't to show that something is better.  It was to show that it's possible and it's not as strange as what some people may think.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but having quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences is a different game to being protected from sweeps because of your stance.


 Stances are everything and they protect you more than you realize.  The fact that kung fu places so much importance on stance should tell you just how valuable it is.   

Without a good stance, all of your "quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences." amount to nothing.  A weak stance makes your attacks and defense weak.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> So you're slamming people on their head while breaking their arm during training on a regular basis?
> 
> Makes one wonder how you're able to maintain so many training partners...


I don't Have a problem maintaining a steady flow of training partners. I have a current ad running on craigslist. It reads: for of a good time of head slamming and arm breaking call 480 555-1212. The response is overwhelming! I can't keep up with the demand. I may have to quit my job.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Nope.. I'm only referring to leg sweeps.   I looked for videos of Wing Chung leg sweeps and couldn't find many examples of a wing chun practitioner doing sweeps.  I found tons of videos of kicks to the legs but not many of sweeps


See since it's a grappling/ground/WC thread. I am referring to sweeping and throwing from contact or clinch. The kicking the leg out thing is not my thing. I can't kick worth a crap!


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> 1. I never said that Jow Ga is better
> 2. I only asked a simple question.  How many sweeps does Wing chun have.
> 
> The stuff that I said wasn't to make my fighting system sound better.  It was to point out what was possible when others were saying that it's not possible.  For example, based on some of the comments, sweeping the unrooted leg is a foreign concept to some people here.  So I posted pictures of me doing just that.  It wasn't to show that something is better.  It was to show that it's possible and it's not as strange as what some people may think.


Look first off. I was shopping at the mall with the wife. So I may have been a bit cranky and harsh. You seem like a cool guy. But when you make assumptions of an art without really understanding the art other than just what's on the surface. I kind of take offense. I'm here to let you know that there is much more to it than what you may see on YouTube. I can't make a video and show you every sweep. Like Mike Tyson would say "that's ludicrous". Plus I don't know every sweep. I know one that I can do many ways? Geezer knows what I'm talking about with my whole "I know one of these and one of those done many different ways", really I'am quoting my teachers. Thats what they say and thats how we are taught at my school.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

geezer said:


> Personally, this latest thing is probably an improvement for ol' Jake. Last time I trained with him he slammed me into a metal picnic table!
> 
> ...OK fact is it was an accident and I didn't get hurt. Jake's a decent guy, so you can safely assume he's talking about the_ intent _or _potential effect_ of the technique, and not expect to find everyone else at the gym with a bandage on their head and cast on their arm.


Steve! Shhhhhhhhhh I have a tough guy persona on here. (Clears throat and talks in tough guy mean voice)YEAH I SLAMMED GEEZER. I TOLD HIM NO CREAM IN MY COFFEE. HE HAD TO PAY FOR THAT OVERSITE. YEAH IM TOUGH!!! (Now back to my regular timid crackly voice) Thanks Geezer our little secret


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Nope.. I'm only referring to leg sweeps.   I looked for videos of Wing Chung leg sweeps and couldn't find many examples of a wing chun practitioner doing sweeps.  I found tons of videos of kicks to the legs but not many of sweeps


I think since WC is close range combat, sweeps are mostly done from a bridge? Sweeping the front leg from kicking range is more of a kicking art thing like Muay Thai or Karate like in my video? At least that's my opinion. Mostly cause I can't kick. I can from a bridge heun ma or hook a leg.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I think since WC is close range combat, sweeps are mostly done from a bridge. Sweeping the front leg is more of a kicking art thing like Muay Thai or Karate like in my video?


 Are the sweep mainly focused on breaking structure and not actually sweeping the person to the point of where they are literally off the ground?


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Are the sweep mainly focused on breaking structure and not actually sweeping the person to the point of where they are literally off the ground?


Yes/no, if I trap both legs with my heun ma you're going for a ride like a typical Judo throw. If I sweep or hook one leg I break your structure and I then can just walk through you and maybe step on your rear weighted leg/foot and crumble you or maybe heun ma and kick which ever leg you try and post with out. Usually in that scenario the opponent ends up crossing there legs. Depends on what I get. Possibilities are endless.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 28, 2015)

I'm pretty sure in chi gerk we try and attack the rear weighted leg in training? I haven't done traditional chi gerk in 20 years. So maybe someone who has can explain better from a traditional standpoint? From a practical standpoint I train what I explained every week both privates and mixed classes with actual grapplers/MMA/Muay Thai. So I'd at least like to think I kind of know what I'm talking about. Atleast 80%, 70%, 60% ok at least 50% of the time


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 28, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I'm pretty sure in chi gerk we try and attack the rear weighted leg in training? I haven't done traditional chi gerk in 20 years. So maybe someone who has can explain better from a traditional standpoint? From a practical standpoint I train what I explained every week both privates and mixed classes with actual grapplers/MMA/Muay Thai. So I'd at least like to think I kind of know what I'm talking about. Atleast 80%, 70%, 60% ok at least 50% of the time


Does the chi gerk work independent of a trap?  I saw a few videos and I couldn't tell if the traps were necessary for making sure that the person doesn't punch you while you do the technique or if these techniques could be done independently of the trap.  Since these chi gerk looks like a close range technique I'm assuming that it is done with a trap or a clinch.
I have an idea about with the Huen ma.  It looks similar to one of the movements I've seen before in other fighting systems.  It's definitely one of those movements that I try to watch out for.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 29, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I don't want to rely on either. This is where sensitivity comes into play. Doesn't wrestling use sensitivity? Don't you counter on the transition?



Yeah but we are discussing two things here. One is that great big wide horse stance and two his ability to manage its short commings 

So a horse stance like that probably is inherently open to all sorts of takedowns. But if he can compensate for them well great guns for him.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 29, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Stances are everything and they protect you more than you realize.  The fact that kung fu places so much importance on stance should tell you just how valuable it is.
> 
> Without a good stance, all of your "quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences." amount to nothing.  A weak stance makes your attacks and defense weak.



Your stance is a compromise. The more you strengthen one side you weaken the other. So the deeper rooted that stance gets the better it can defend elements like trying to secure the hips.but the worse it becomes at having that foot reaped out.

When you throw someone. You work that principle by using combinations of throws.

So you have an inherent weakness in that stance. But when called on it your response is you are too slick to get trapped.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 29, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Your stance is a compromise. The more you strengthen one side you weaken the other. So the deeper rooted that stance gets the better it can defend elements like trying to secure the hips.but the worse it becomes at having that foot reaped out.
> 
> When you throw someone. You work that principle by using combinations of throws.
> 
> So you have an inherent weakness in that stance. But when called on it your response is you are too slick to get trapped.


My stance isn't a "big ole wide horse stance"  like the one Jake Mace is doing. 

I use a low horse stance in free sparring and what I'm saying is from experience and not from guessing at what I think it will do. 
Do you use a low horse stance in free sparring?  If not then you don't have the understanding of the horse stance in the same light that I do.  If you do WC then you may never even be in a horse stance that low because it breaks the foundation that needed for WC techniques.

Is there a weakness in my horse stance? Yes, but it isn't the weaknesses that you are claiming.  The reason I know is because I fight in this stance a lot, which gives me up close and personal understanding of what works with this stance and what doesn't.

Do you know why I don't tell WC practitioners that their stances are useless and what can and can't be done from their stance?  It's because I don't fight in their stance, so how can I tell them about a stance that they are always fighting in?  How can you tell me about the stance that I'm always fighting in, when you don't fight in it, nor try to understand it on a deeper level.

Someone joke about me posting videos that take up bandwidth.  I only show videos of me using the techniques that I say I use because of people like you, who can't take what I'm saying as true.  And each time I've been able to show that I do what I say, which is more than most people have done.  If you do WC then the information that I give you can only help you when you spar against someone who fights in a low stance.  But instead of trying to learn you just rather say that I'm "too slick"


----------



## drop bear (Nov 29, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> My stance isn't a "big ole wide horse stance"  like the one Jake Mace is doing.
> 
> I use a low horse stance in free sparring and what I'm saying is from experience and not from guessing at what I think it will do.
> Do you use a low horse stance in free sparring?  If not then you don't have the understanding of the horse stance in the same light that I do.  If you do WC then you may never even be in a horse stance that low because it breaks the foundation that needed for WC techniques.
> ...



You are not really reading what i am posting are you?


----------



## geezer (Nov 29, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I use a low horse stance in free sparring and what I'm saying is from experience   ...Is there a weakness in my horse stance? Yes, but it isn't the weaknesses that you are claiming.



In my limited experience with low, wide stances, the first trade off is less mobility in return for greater stability. The images you've posted of yourself sparring in a low horse (by WC standards) suggest that this might be a problem, especially working against a lanky, evasive opponent.

The other possible vulnerability I spot might be that lead knee if targeted by _quick kicks_ as well as sweeps. Have any of your sparring partners who favor a higher, more mobile stance tried to target your knee and shins with rapid kicks? Has it ever been a problem?


----------



## geezer (Nov 29, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> .
> 
> Without a good stance, all of your "quick reactions or a brilliant arsenal of defences." amount to nothing.  A *weak* stance makes your attacks and defense weak.



This statement is, broadly speaking, true. A good, _strong_ stance is essential. But there are many kinds of strength. The horse stance you use in Jow Ga is an example of one type of strength that provides an appropriate foundation to your system. WC's higher _Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma _or character two goat-riding stance provides a more flexible or yielding foundation, better suited to the WC system. 

Flexible stances can be strong too. The deeper horse has the yang strength of the oak tree, while the YGKYM has the yin strength of bamboo. Each survives the storm according to it's nature.

Now how's that for _fortune cookie_ wisdom!


----------



## yak sao (Nov 29, 2015)

geezer said:


> Flexible stances can be strong too. The deeper horse has the yang strength of the oak tree, while the YGKYM has the yin strength of bamboo. Each survives the storm according to it's nature.
> 
> Now how's that for _fortune cookie_ wisdom!



.........in bed.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 29, 2015)

geezer said:


> In my limited experience with low, wide stances, the first trade off is less mobility in return for greater stability. The images you've posted of yourself sparring in a low horse (by WC standards) suggest that this might be a problem, especially working against a lanky, evasive opponent.
> 
> The other possible vulnerability I spot might be that lead knee if targeted by _quick kicks_ as well as sweeps. Have any of your sparring partners who favor a higher, more mobile stance tried to target your knee and shins with rapid kicks? Has it ever been a problem?


It's possible to chase someone down while in a low horse stance but it's not easy.  It requires a tremendous amount of leg muscle endurance and strength.  That's one of the biggest weaknesses of the stance. Everything is fine with mobility when it's done in bursts, but we can't sustain that for long periods of times.  For example, it's possible to move with the same speed and evasiveness that Floyd Mayweather uses, but it's only for a short period of time.  I could chase someone 15 feet down the street at 20 feet my legs are burning and no longer able to move with efficiency.  

Yes they targeted my knee and the stance is vulnerable to the kick if it comes from the side.  It doesn't break the knee.  It turns the knee inward (I actually had my kung fur brother kick me in the knee softly at first and then to gradually kick harder.  The end result is that I went down to my knee and was kneeling with my back turned to him.  I'm thinking that I'll need to either shuffle forward or towards the kick in order to prevent it. I haven't worked it out yet but I'm aware of not letting  too many kicks to my leg to go unchallenged.

I had a kid kick me full force straight on my knee by accident and I was so thankful that I was in horse because the force of that kick would have broken my knee.  She hit the front of it but because the knee was bent it couldn't bend the other way.  Another reason to have knees slightly bent regardless of what stance one is in.  

Sweeps are surprisingly easy to deal with while in a low stance because I can see the leg movements better. I can see kicks but they are quick and the stance puts me at a dangerous kicking level.  Between kicks and sweeps, the kicks are the things that I worry about the most.  

Someone who is taller than me, wouldn't get the same low horse stance because the purpose of the low stance that I do is be lower than my opponent by a certain amount.  The taller my opponent is the higher up I can be, which is why I rather fight taller opponents.  

I know that Wing Chun doesn't do a low stance because the techniques weren't designed for a low stance.  For WC I think of someone fighting in a narrow hall way with limited room.  In environments like that I would have to use the higher stances that our style has.  We actually have a stance that's similar to Wing Chun.  I saw a video one day and I thought that I was looking at WC, but it was Jow Ga.  The stance is similar but not the trapping and the rest of the other stuff.


----------



## geezer (Nov 30, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I saw a video one day and I thought that I was looking at WC, but it was Jow Ga.  The stance is similar...



There's a lot of surprising stuff once you scratch the surface. For example, the following is WC. For some reason this guy didn't think it was hard enough as it is, so he's wearing a 50#  weight vest!


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 30, 2015)

geezer said:


> There's a lot of surprising stuff once you scratch the surface. For example, the following is WC. For some reason this guy didn't think it was hard enough as it is, so he's wearing a 50#  weight vest!


I looked up this exercise and I noticed that many people have their feet turned outward.  This decreases stability and it doesn't strengthen the correct leg muscles required to make that stance strong and rooted.  The legs will get stronger but the stance won't have a strong root. 

That exercise  with the feet turning out strengthens the hamstrings instead of the quadriceps

Is there a reason why the feet are out like that in WC?


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2015)

geezer said:


> This statement is, broadly speaking, true. A good, _strong_ stance is essential. But there are many kinds of strength. The horse stance you use in Jow Ga is an example of one type of strength that provides an appropriate foundation to your system. WC's higher _Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma _or character two goat-riding stance provides a more flexible or yielding foundation, better suited to the WC system.
> 
> Flexible stances can be strong too. The deeper horse has the yang strength of the oak tree, while the YGKYM has the yin strength of bamboo. Each survives the storm according to it's nature.
> 
> Now how's that for _fortune cookie_ wisdom!




Well again if you are slick you can do a narrow stance and still defend takedowns.

We do a half half witch is not a solution it is a compromise.

But when you defend a take down.  You dont stay in stance.  You ajust your stance to counter the take down.  

If they have any skill they ajust the take down.

From there there is this race switching takedowns and stances untill someone wins.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 30, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I looked up this exercise and I noticed that many people have their feet turned outward. This decreases stability and it doesn't strengthen the correct leg muscles required to make that stance strong and rooted. The legs will get stronger but the stance won't have a strong root.



I will try to get an answer from exercise guy. You are sugesting parallel feet are better structure?


----------



## geezer (Nov 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I will try to get an answer from exercise guy. You are sugesting parallel feet are better structure?





@ _Jow Ga and Drop Bear:_ Yes, parallel feet are the "correct"  traditional way to do a horse stance in most CMA:

http://practicalhungkyun.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/practical-hung-kyun-stance-training-02.jpg

I do not know why the individual in the video has his feet turned out ...I got that clip on youtube, and it's from a different branch of the Ip Man lineage so I can only speculate.

As for myself, I have bone-fusions in my ankles that prevent lateral movement, and I'm duck -footed, that is, my feet naturally turn out that way. In fact the right foot turns out at about 20-30 degrees when my knee is pointing directly forward. One of my kung-fu teachers many years ago used to get very angry at my "lazy" horse stance until he found out that I physically _could_ _not_ do the "traditional" version. I asked if he could work around it. He said no, it was better that I go elsewhere.

...So, I ended up in WC where I _can_ do the more upright YGKYM stance with it's internally adducted knees with only minor deviation from standard form.

Looking back, I do not believe that the parallel foot alignment in the Chinese horse stance or Ma Bo has any great advantage over the splayed foot horse used in some other martial arts:

http://zhkarate.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Shikodachi.jpg

I believe that aesthetics play a considerable role in these conventions. It kind of reminds me of the way my granddad, an old rancher, would scold me about how I rode a horse with my feet turned out "like Charlie Chaplin". It "just didn't look right and they would catch in the brush!" He was actually right about the last part. Other than that I like to think I rode pretty well for a dude from the city.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yeah but we are discussing two things here. One is that great big wide horse stance and two his ability to manage its short commings
> 
> So a horse stance like that probably is inherently open to all sorts of takedowns. But if he can compensate for them well great guns for him.


Sorry the ADHD is hard for me to stay focused. But I agree 100% with what you said.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 30, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> Does the chi gerk work independent of a trap?  I saw a few videos and I couldn't tell if the traps were necessary for making sure that the person doesn't punch you while you do the technique or if these techniques could be done independently of the trap.  Since these chi gerk looks like a close range technique I'm assuming that it is done with a trap or a clinch.
> I have an idea about with the Huen ma.  It looks similar to one of the movements I've seen before in other fighting systems.  It's definitely one of those movements that I try to watch out for.


Trapping the legs yes. Trapping the hands not so much. Really depends on what hand trapping method  we're talking about here? Hand or arm trapping as in application? Like maybe over hooking the arm then sweeping the legs, then yes? Trapping like tradition drilling teaches? Like folding over arms like origami, then no? Trapping is simple. If I have your arm or leg controlled it's a trap. Which is the practical version or goal of the traditional trap drilling in WC and will work.  If I turn your arms into an origami pterodactyl then it may only work in training with a cooperative partner. Trapping the legs is something I like to do a lot. In both my throwing and standing chokes. I like to use my legs to disrupt structure.

If someone is throwing a punch, flowery hand or leg techniques are not as effective as controlling that persons COG and balance. Control and angle will a lot of times take care of the opponents attack. Why? Cause he'll be playing catch up trying to recover his structure and balance.

For example:
If I have an over hook and you punch with your free hand.

A:
If I'm square in front of you then we trade blows.

B:
But if I have an angle or flank a bit, as you punch i Jeun Ma. Well I may get the break but even better I make it impossible for you to punch. Plus it's all done with one arm. Remember I still have a free arm and I'm in a better position.

So trapping does work. If you don't fight arms but instead the whole unit.


----------



## Jake104 (Nov 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Well again if you are slick you can do a narrow stance and still defend takedowns.
> 
> We do a half half witch is not a solution it is a compromise.
> 
> ...


Again the ADHD. But what about attacking the take down with good downward foward intent? Stuffing? See I'm getting older and broken. So that's how we do it. We try and stuff if. We attack at contact. Not so much with strikes but with our weight combined with foward intent fighting for position using WC principles or full body chi sao.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I will try to get an answer from exercise guy. You are sugesting parallel feet are better structure?


Yes the parallel feet gives a better structure, so I'm wondering if there is another reason for having the feet turned out.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 1, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Again the ADHD. But what about attacking the take down with good downward foward intent? Stuffing? See I'm getting older and broken. So that's how we do it. We try and stuff if. We attack at contact. Not so much with strikes but with our weight combined with foward intent fighting for position using WC principles or full body chi sao.



If you forward intent without sprawling you will get sucked into the takedown. Like this.







You can defend by making your hips lower than theirs. But it all just depends what you mean.

Here is an example of what I am sort of talking about. The throws don't come at one angle.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 1, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Your stance is a compromise.





JowGaWolf said:


> I use a low horse stance in free sparring and what I'm saying is from experience and not from guessing at what I think it will do.
> Do you use a low horse stance in free sparring? If not then you don't have the understanding of the horse stance in the same light that I do.





geezer said:


> In my limited experience with low, wide stances, the first trade off is less mobility in return for greater stability. The images you've posted of yourself sparring in a low horse (by WC standards) suggest that this might be a problem, especially working against a lanky, evasive opponent.





JowGaWolf said:


> It's possible to chase someone down while in a low horse stance but it's not easy. It requires a tremendous amount of leg muscle endurance and strength. That's one of the biggest weaknesses of the stance. Everything is fine with mobility when it's done in bursts, but we can't sustain that for long periods of times. For example, it's possible to move with the same speed and evasiveness that Floyd Mayweather uses, but it's only for a short period of time. I could chase someone 15 feet down the street at 20 feet my legs are burning and no longer able to move with efficiency.
> 
> Yes they targeted my knee and the stance is vulnerable to the kick if it comes from the side. It doesn't break the knee. It turns the knee inward (I actually had my kung fur brother kick me in the knee softly at first and then to gradually kick harder. The end result is that I went down to my knee and was kneeling with my back turned to him. I'm thinking that I'll need to either shuffle forward or towards the kick in order to prevent it. I haven't worked it out yet but I'm aware of not letting too many kicks to my leg to go unchallenged.



In general, as geezer points out, higher stances give better mobility and lower stances give better stability. For takedowns, getting lower than your opponent is a major advantage, even if it's not strictly necessary every single time.

This is why, in general, boxers fight from much higher stances than wrestlers. For evasive striking, the mobility from a higher stance is more important. For performing takedowns and avoiding being taken down, a lower stance is better. MMA fighters tend to look for a compromise between the two. (Judoka take a different approach, working from a higher stance for mobility when fighting outside, then dropping their weight to get under the opponent just as they enter for the throw.)

Jow Ga (and a number of other CMA) have an interesting approach, focusing on striking, but from a low stance that helps defend takedowns. I haven't done a ton of sparring against folks working from that stance. Given that I am a mediocre takedown artist, my first instinct would be to work my standup striking with evasive footwork and target the legs with kicks. I might look for takedowns if I saw the opportunity, but I wouldn't necessarily try to force them. On the other hand, high-level wrestlers will have spent a lot of time taking down opponents with an even lower center of gravity than you can get from a low horse stance, so they would probably feel a lot more comfortable forcing the takedown.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 1, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> On the other hand, high-level wrestlers will have spent a lot of time taking down opponents with an even lower center of gravity than you can get from a low horse stance, so they would probably feel a lot more comfortable forcing the takedown.


  keep in mind that they do this in the context that their opponent doesn't strike them and they aren't striking their opponent.


----------



## Vajramusti (Dec 1, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> I looked up this exercise and I noticed that many people have their feet turned outward.  This decreases stability and it doesn't strengthen the correct leg muscles required to make that stance strong and rooted.  The legs will get stronger but the stance won't have a strong root.
> 
> That exercise  with the feet turning out strengthens the hamstrings instead of the quadriceps
> 
> Is there a reason why the feet are out like that in WC?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wong shon Leung used to practice battle punches.I sometimes do too. Wing chun has an extensive curriculum. Some exercises are for development of key attributes and do not immediately apply or self evident initially for fighting.
The classic archery war  technique known as the Parthian shot involved similar motion. The Parthians on horseback in Iran(horse riding stance) would gallop a bit away from the enemy and then  and fire their arrows turn their upper body-similar to the wing chun pulling punch theme.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 1, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> keep in mind that they do this in the context that their opponent doesn't strike them and they aren't striking their opponent.


Yep. However it's good to remember that

a) some wrestlers do have striking experience and know how to adapt to it and
b) *really* high level wrestlers have takedowns that are so hard and fast and sophisticated that unless you can reliably knock them out with a single strike, they are going to take you down even if you manage to land a punch as they come in.

A story from Mark Coleman might indicate something about the high-level wrestling mentality. As he tells it, one time (before their MMA careers) he was at a wrestling tournament with Kevin Randalman. Kevin won one of his matches, but in the process he got his jaw dislocated. The tournament officials told him he would not be allowed to fight his next match with the injury and so would end up forfeiting his chance of winning the tournament. So Kevin went to Mark and asked him "punch me in the jaw and see if you can knock it back into place." Mark (quite reasonably) refused to do this. So Kevin ran to the edge of the mat, put his face sidewise to the ground, and slammed the side of his face into the mat until he had knocked his jaw back in place. Then he went on to fight the rest of his matches.

Granted, Randalman is a bit crazy even for a wrestler, but this shows something about the toughness of high-level wrestlers and how hard it is going to be to stop them with a single punch.


----------



## Buka (Dec 1, 2015)

Do any of you guys who use a low horse stance ever get your feet swept out from under you?


----------



## geezer (Dec 1, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> The classic archery war  technique known as the Parthian shot involved similar motion. The Parthians on horseback in Iran(horse riding stance) would ...fire their arrows turn their upper body-similar to the wing chun pulling punch theme.



Parthian Archer






Wing Chun "Bow and Arrow punch" aka "Battle Punch":







See... I actually learn stuff on these forums. Thanks, Joy.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 1, 2015)

Buka said:


> Do any of you guys who use a low horse stance ever get your feet swept out from under you?


The 50-50 horse stance is not a proper stance to be used to against foot sweep.

It has too

- much weight that's hard to lift your foot up to "escape" a sweep.
- less weight that's not strong enough to turn your shin bone to "against" a sweep.

If you have to switch a horse stance into an empty stance, or a bow-arrow stance, you are not using horse stance.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 1, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> keep in mind that they do this in the context that their opponent doesn't strike them and they aren't striking their opponent.



They do if they ever fight or Spar a striker. In fact wrestlers with some craptastic striking can still win fights by tying people up and taking them down.

When someone strikes they take their hands away from their hips. And so loose a level of protection. They also give that forward momentum. That let's baby get picked up so easily in that lift.
(Of course she has an advantage in that nobody puts her in a corner)


----------



## drop bear (Dec 1, 2015)

Buka said:


> Do any of you guys who use a low horse stance ever get your feet swept out from under you?


Yes. Capoeira is all horse stance pretty much.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Dec 1, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Yes. Capoeira is all horse stance pretty much.


What I saw was several successful sweeps that would NOT have been successful if it weren't for the dancing footwork, wide stance, and their high center of gravity. Maybe that's pointing out the obvious though.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 1, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> What I saw was several successful sweeps that would NOT have been successful if it weren't for the dancing footwork, wide stance, and their high center of gravity. Maybe that's pointing out the obvious though.



Yeah.  It is more pronounced there.  But you have to move your feet.  And when you do you will open yourself up. On the other side of that is the target foot also isnt just sitting there to be picked off either.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 1, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The 50-50 horse stance is not a proper stance to be used to against foot sweep.
> 
> It has too
> 
> ...


"*It has too much weight that's hard to lift your foot up to "escape" a sweep*."  It's not hard.  Don't focus on lifting your foot. focus on lifting your knee. The ease and speed of the lift comes from lifting the knee.
This may make it clearer

He steps behind my horse to destroy my stance.  I move the weight to my back leg the moment he makes contact. I'm in about a 30% %70 horse stance
He begins the sweeping motion with his leg.  You can see the space between my leg and his leg. That space was caused from him hitting my relaxed leg. At this point he's no longer sweeping me and I just need to keep lighting that leg to continue with the flow flowing
 The leg that he swept is completely out of danger.
I put my leg back on the ground and regain my stance while pushing him away from me.







This improved version of this would be to go from horse stance to a cat stance.  I wouldn't recommend this while in a high stance because it puts the rooted leg too close to the sweeping leg. in this case this is where the horse stance helps.  It doesn't show in #1 but I was in a horse stance when he initiated the move.  You can't tell here but my rooted leg stayed in one place from the time I rooted it to the end. 

"*It has too less weight that's not strong enough to turn your shin bone to*" I'm not sure what this means.  If you mean a Shin to Shin Sweep, then Shin to Shin sweeps aren't recommended because they hurt and because it takes more effort make it work.  I avoid shin to shin sweeps like the plague.  If you are sweeping towards my shin then you are sweeping in the same direction that my shin bends.  If I see that I'm not going to be able to lift my leg fast enough, then I'll shift the weight to my back leg and relax the front leg.  Because my front leg is relaxed it then flows over the sweep.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 1, 2015)

JowGaWolf said:


> "*It has too less weight that's not strong enough to turn your shin bone to*" I'm not sure what this means.  If you mean a Shin to Shin Sweep, then Shin to Shin sweeps aren't recommended because they hurt and because it takes more effort make it work.  I avoid shin to shin sweeps like the plague.  If you are sweeping towards my shin then you are sweeping in the same direction that my shin bends.  If I see that I'm not going to be able to lift my leg fast enough, then I'll shift the weight to my back leg and relax the front leg.  Because my front leg is relaxed it then flows over the sweep.


When your opponent sweeps or kicks you with low roundhouse kick, you should be able to twist your low leg and meet your shin bone with his shin bone. It's like 2 swords hit on each other. The strong blade will break the weak blade.


----------



## Buka (Dec 2, 2015)

I've never stepped behind a stance and then swept. Sweep going in.


----------

