# WT lineage stance/steps to enhance rooting and power generation?



## geezer (Jun 29, 2020)

Warning, The Geezer has some ideas to debate about "WT" stances and steps. Here's Chapter 1:

Some you here have had experience in the WT or WingTsun branch of the Ip Man lineage of Leung Ting. This was the lineage that I trained, and one of it's most distinguishing traits is its peculiar, ....perhaps even _extreme _take on the WC stance.

Many branches of WC favor a somewhat back-weighted stance when posing one foot forward (as compared to the square-on Yee Gee Kim Ma or "Character Two" / "IRAS" stance). Typically that would be wighting the rear leg 60-70%. In the WT branch, the stance is said to be back weighted 100%. All the bodies "dead" weight is placed on the rear foot and only a light "pressure" is put on the front foot.

The best descriptive analogy heard was that of a man sitting on the edge of a bar stool with one leg extended onto the floor. His dead weight is carried 100% by the stool yet he can put pressure on the floor. Since the stool carries all his weight, he can move or lift his extended leg up off the floor at will, or set it back down with pressure to scoot or adjust the position of his stool. Like this old guy:






Now the real challenge comes when you are told to _maintain this weighting when advancing_. You are told to extend your front foot, grip the ground and literally drag your whole body forward _without_ unweighting or lifting up the rear, weight-bearing leg at all.

At first this seems an impossible task. Later, making some weighting adjustments most students actually do develop a certain degree of ability to move like this. Some remain clumsy and slow. Others integrate what I call "compensatory techniques" and ultimately come up with something that, while not quite totally back-weighted, is very close to this model yet also functional. In some cases, _more_ than functional. Even _explosive._ Watch this guy at 2:28-2:30, slow it down to 50% and watch how his rear foot stays on the ground.






So here are a few questions, especially for anybody who spent any time training this in WT.

1. Were you able to make this stance work for you at all?

2. If so, what do you feel were it's advantages and disadvantages.

3. Do you still use this approach, and if so have you made any personal modifications?


----------



## geezer (Jun 29, 2020)

Thought I'd backtrack and include this short video for anybody with no idea of what si taught in the "WT" lineage:


----------



## APL76 (Jun 29, 2020)

Guangzhou wing chun has 100% of the weight on the back leg. It works fine, just takes a lot of stance, and then jun ma, training to make it functional. I wouldn't think of it as back weighted though, to me that suggests a slight backward tilt, something that you see a lot of in wing chun generally, and something we avoid. Its more just weight centred over one leg rather than two.


----------



## dvcochran (Jun 29, 2020)

Had to laugh; when I saw WT I immediately thought World TKD.


----------



## geezer (Jun 30, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Had to laugh; when I saw WT I immediately thought World TKD.



...And what do you suppose people outside TKD think every time someone uses the letters "WTF"?  

And you know, people say that Ip Man's choice of romanization, "Ving Tsun" or "VT" ...as well as Leung Ting's later use of the spelling "Wing Tsun" or "WT" both stemmed, in part, from a desire not to call the art "WC" ....meaning _the toilet_ in the Hong Kong/British English vernacular.


----------



## geezer (Jun 30, 2020)

APL76 said:


> Guangzhou wing chun has 100% of the weight on the back leg. It works fine, just takes a lot of stance, and then jun ma, training to make it functional. I wouldn't think of it as back weighted though, to me that suggests a slight backward tilt, something that you see a lot of in wing chun generally, and something we avoid. Its more just weight centred over one leg rather than two.



When I trained WT with Leung Ting, some members of our group were already very experienced in another branch of Ip Man lineage "WC", including the sifu of the school I previously trained at. Yet he made us _all_ start over _beginning with the stance_.

He insisted that we work on our basic weighting, turning, and stepping for hours and hours, day after day (of our very limited training time) until he was certain that it was just so. He impressed upon us that _this_ was what made his WT "different", and it was much more important than how many forms or techniques we "knew".

Years of training these methods, equally the _seung ma_ and _dap bo _(the back weighted stance and "pursuing step" discussed above) and the WT version of _chuen ma_ (turning stance) has led me to believe that the greatest benefit of the knee adduction and weight shifting is_ not _limited _to _what is initially taught at all. There is another, more important reason. That's why I'm asking others to weigh in on this. I'd like to see what's the rationale _they've_ been taught or come up with. And, that's why I posted the questions above.


----------



## APL76 (Jun 30, 2020)

geezer said:


> When I trained WT with Leung Ting, some members of our group were already very experienced in another branch of Ip Man lineage "WC", including the sifu of the school I previously trained at. Yet he made us _all_ start over _beginning with the stance_.
> 
> He insisted that we work on our basic weighting, turning, and stepping for hours and hours, day after day (of our very limited training time) until he was certain that it was just so. He impressed upon us that _this_ was what made his WT "different", and it was much more important than how many forms or techniques we "knew".
> 
> Years of training these methods, equally the _seung ma_ and _dap bo _(the back weighted stance and "pursuing step" discussed above) and the WT version of _chuen ma_ (turning stance) has led me to believe that the greatest benefit of the knee adduction and weight shifting is_ not _limited _to _what is initially taught at all. There is another, more important reason. That's why I'm asking others to weigh in on this. I'd like to see what's the rationale _they've_ been taught or come up with. And, that's why I posted the questions above.



OK, if I get the question we see a number of advantages to it.

Foremost the way Guangzhou footwork works is that the stance is alive, we don't dig the stuck "rooted" stance and the redirection of force to the ground thing...…….generally speaking. We have that idea too, but under most circumstances the stance is a combination of aliveness, so light on the feet, and solidly grounded at the moment of impact. So we try to combine grounding, or "rooting" if one prefers (always gets a snicker or two among Australians), and fluidity and motion. What we usually end up with in application is that you will be on one leg and have your light, non-weighted leg closest to the opponent. That's under most circumstances anyway. 

So for us the main(ish) reason to have 100% of the weight in the back leg is to make it harder for an opponent to upend you by sweeping out the front leg. And sweeping out a weighted front leg is a thing we would try to do.

Probably the next reason for it would be to keep the front (and so closest) leg open for faster ability to launch kicks and to defend against kicks. Essentially, so you can deploy that leg without first having to shift weight off of it. 

Having said all of that though we would also not generally step straight ahead like the guy in the video, however we can and do do that if required, and it looks more or less the way he did it as far as I could see. But, what we would try to do more often is to flank to the sides and in that instance you swap front legs. So if I were to step to the left, my left foot would lead and I would follow with the heun bo from bui ji so that my right foot would end up closest to the opponent and my left leg (started as my front foot) would end up being the rear supporting leg. Hopefully that makes sense. 

Now. Where the rear weighting in jun ma practice counts in the flanking step is that if you shift from 100% of weight from one to the other leg your body moves quite a lot through the jun ma from one side to the other. That distance that you move through the jun ma is in a straight line, from one side to another, when you do it as part of the flanking step it causes your body to arch slightly through the step which provides clearance for you to avoid an oncoming strike and to position you so that when you deliver your technique (say a tan sao) the force you deliver in the tan sao does not excessively cross the oncoming force of the attack. So not only giving clearance through the step, but it ensures that you don't deliver your force in a way that can be evaded and exploited.

Hopefully that makes sense. It could be a bit difficult to visualise.


----------



## dvcochran (Jun 30, 2020)

geezer said:


> ...And what do you suppose people outside TKD think every time someone uses the letters "WTF"?
> 
> And you know, people say that Ip Man's choice of romanization, "Ving Tsun" or "VT" ...as well as Leung Ting's later use of the spelling "Wing Tsun" or "WT" both stemmed, in part, from a desire not to call the art "WC" ....meaning _the toilet_ in the Hong Kong/British English vernacular.


Haha. The first time I heard/saw WTF back in 1986 I laughed out loud during a meeting. Got some hard looks and a tongue lashing with that one. It was never explicitly acknowledged but it is a big reason for the name change.


----------



## yak sao (Jun 30, 2020)

I find the 100 percent weighted back leg to be very practical and easy to maneuver. While it is extremely awkward and robotic as a beginner, with diligent practice it becomes natural and very fluid.

It is the very mechanism that allows everything else to fall into place and be utilized...thing like staying behind your structure, fighting behind your elbows, being relaxed and springy...if you take the 100 percent stance away these things become very difficult to pull off if not downright impossible.


----------



## geezer (Jun 30, 2020)

yak sao said:


> ...if you take the *100 percent stance* away these things become very difficult to pull off if not downright impossible.


 I agree with all that you said, although in practice, _my_ true weight distribution is closer to ...maybe 90% rear - 10% front. With my crappy, bone-fused ankles that gives me (personally) the best trade-off between back-weighting and overall stability if pressed or jolted. Any more weight on the front, and it's hard to maintain that "aliveness" that APL76 talked about as well as the ability to recover from a sweep (or other attack) to the front leg.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 30, 2020)

geezer said:


> _my_ true weight distribution is closer to ...maybe 90% rear - 10% front.


I like weight distribution:

- 3-7 stance (30%-70%) for striking, and
- 4-6 stance (40%-60%) for wrestling.

The back weight empty stance (10%, 90%) has PRO and CON.

PRO: Read to kick, safe from opponent's sweep.
CON: Easy to be run down, don't have enough reach, difficult for weight shifting (bad mobility).

If you want to move to the side, before you can lift your back foot off the ground, from a

- 3-7 stance, you only have to shift 70% weight to your leading foot,
- empty (1-9) stance, you have to shift 90% weight to your leading foot,

That extra 20% weight shifting can slowdown your side step footwork. But if you don't like to move around, the empty stance is a safe defense stance.


----------



## APL76 (Jun 30, 2020)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> asy to be run down, don't have enough reach, difficult for weight shifting (bad mobility).



ant THAT is one of the primary reasons we train the turning stance to death and then some. As Yak Sao said, its awkward and robotic at first but with propper training the cons are far far outweighed by the pros. If you have explosive jun ma with the power generated from the hips it takes care of all those issues.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 30, 2020)

I think stance and steps is a bit of a misconception. The guys who are like running in to a wall make movements counter to your movements. 

That is kind of why they feel solid. 

If they did a stance then as soon as you change direction they will topple.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 30, 2020)

The wider stance (such as 4-6 stance) is much safer. If your opponent's leg (or hand) can reach to your back leg, you will be in trouble.

To allow your opponent to reach to your 

- leading leg, you can still counter it. 
- back leg, you will lose chance to counter it. 

Both empty stance and inward narrow horse stance all have the same issue. That is your opponent can reach to your back leg.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 2, 2020)

geezer said:


> Thought I'd backtrack and include this short video for anybody with no idea of what si taught in the "WT" lineage:



"Seung Ma" eh? Sure, 上.  But to be really seung, or seurng....come on, who's with me??

If these guys are going to bastardize Cantonese, let's begin with 吊馬步, the source of all of these stances.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Some interesting posts, but so far nobody has really gone in the direction I was hoping, which was relating the 100% back weighted stance in seung ma, or the 100% shift to the side in chuen ma to _power generation.
_
When training these stances and steps in WT, we were shown how the rear-weighting in seung ma made our front foot very alive to quickly evade and counter an attack to our legs, we were shown how it made possible "shadowless" (non-telegraphic) front kick, and how this stance allowed quick, light movement in any direction. All good. But there is another aspect that I feel in insufficiently emphasized. That is how the back-weighted advancing step contributes to_ power generation_, putting the full body-weight into a punch without the commitment of throwing your body-weight onto your front leg.

Traditionally in many Chinese martial arts you hear the phrase, _fou, chum, tun, tou_ or_ float, sink, swallow, spit. _This can often be related to power generation, such as when you _sink_ and drop your body into a punch. This old Chinese mottto is deep and is worth pondering. But in practice I prefer a very simple "non-denominational" way to consider four main methods of power generation in all martial arts:* Sink, rise, rotate, press forward.*

All four of the above come into play when you punch and step using the back-weighted _dap bo, _but especially the sink as you extend your front leg and then the rise and press as you pull up the rear, carrying your whole body weight with it. As you extend or "reach forward" with your front leg, your body also launches forward and must sink as well for the font leg to grip the ground. If you co-ordinate the timing of your straight "sun punch or _yat chi chung kuen _with your lead leg, your impact will be augmented by your forward burst and subtle weight drop. 

To see this demonstrated, *watch the following video at 15:45-15:48*, set the speed on the _slowest_ setting and notice how Emin synchronizes his punch with his lead leg to send Michael Casey flying off screen! 





Or again, with a "shoulder punch" in the following clip at *2:20-2:23  *





Note: the WT shoulder-punch always works best with _sinking force_ - the shoulder drops into the target. So many people try to do it rising and it ends up being more of a "push".

Now I don't have as clear a clip of timing of the punch being synchronized with the rear foot to use _rising _energy. In the following video Leung Ting demonstrates this energy at *5:11-5:14* but his feet are not in the frame. Still, if you watch it on a slow setting and watch how his body moves, I think it illustrates the point well enough:


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 2, 2020)

The only time your stance is "100% back weighted" is when you are standing on your rear leg and nothing else.

There's a chicken joke here, but I'm keeping that in my pocket for now.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Oily Dragon said:


> "Seung Ma" eh? Sure, 上.  But to be really seung, or seurng....come on, who's with me??
> 
> If these guys are going to bastardize Cantonese, let's begin with 吊馬步, the source of all of these stances.



We Americans are all bastards anyway. Look at our ancestry. And we are the world's worst linguists, hands down. Sure there are exceptions, like my neighbor when I was growing up. She speaks English, German, Hungarian, Spanish, Italian and French. That I know of. And her son has been living in China for years, is married to a wealthy Chinese woman and speaks very good Mandarin. But that's astonishingly rare in the US. 

Besides as my old Chinese sifu used to say, "I'm not teaching you Chinese, I'm teaching you _my_ gung-fu". He was quite content to use English terms for most techniques. I think all the Gwai-lo students (myself included) just felt like people expected us to throw in a little bit of pigeon Cantonese, like so much MSG, to spice up the recipe. But, truth be told, that just gives it a bad taste! 

On the other hand, my sifu also once said something like, "So very many people in the world speak Chinese, but almost none know real gung-fu ...so don't worry so much!"


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Oily Dragon said:


> The only time your stance is "100% back weighted" is when you are standing on your rear leg and nothing else.
> There's a chicken joke here, but I'm keeping that in my pocket for now.



If you have a chicken in your pocket, i'd rather not know about it...


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 2, 2020)

geezer said:


> We Americans are all bastards anyway. Look at our ancestry. And we are the world's worst linguists, hands down. Sure there are exceptions, like my neighbor when I was growing up. She speaks English, German, Hungarian, Spanish, Italian and French. That I know of. And her son has been living in China for years, is married to a wealthy Chinese woman and speaks very good Mandarin. But that's astonishingly rare in the US.
> 
> Besides as my old Chinese sifu used to say, "I'm not teaching you Chinese, I'm teaching you _my_ gung-fu". He was quite content to use English terms for most techniques. I think all the Gwai-lo students (myself included) just felt like people expected us to throw in a little bit of pigeon Cantonese, like so much MSG, to spice up the recipe. But, truth be told, that just gives it a bad taste!
> 
> On the other hand, my sifu also once said something like, "So very many people in the world speak Chinese, but almost none know real gung-fu ...so don't worry so much!"



Diu, ma bo.  吊.  

You either get it, or you don't.  

Such is the way of all Shaolin styles.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 2, 2020)

geezer said:


> If you have a chicken in your pocket, i'd rather not know about it...



Chinese martial techniques are connected by metaphor chains.  Cats to chickens to dragons, stuff like that.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Oily Dragon said:


> Diu, ma bo.  吊.
> You either get it, or you don't.
> Such is the way of all Shaolin styles.



I think I'm missing the point, although many years ago, I hung out with some Chinese and Mexican guys, and well, _"diu"_ was a word word we used sorta like _"chingada" _....I don't know if either of these will get past the censor on this forum.... but what that would mean to the ordinary Cantonese speaker when paired with _ma bo_ (horse stance) I don't have a clue! ...Except "diu" is exactly how I personally feel about having to hold a deep horse stance. Not my cuppa tea.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2020)

geezer said:


> Warning, The Geezer has some ideas to debate about "WT" stances and steps. Here's Chapter 1:
> 
> Some you here have had experience in the WT or WingTsun branch of the Ip Man lineage of Leung Ting. This was the lineage that I trained, and one of it's most distinguishing traits is its peculiar, ....perhaps even _extreme _take on the WC stance.
> 
> ...


Geezer,
I've spoken on this in the past. In my training and journey my stance, shifting, weight distribution has been:
In the beginning 100% rear foot. Here I learned both the step-slide as well as the step-pull movement.
As I advanced the weight distribution became more toward 70-30 and then shifting between 50-50 to as much as 100% (after all one can't kick or knee with weight on the leg used for the kick or knee) We also use different pivoting and shifting based on need not adhere to pivoting in one manner. 
When studying the person you refer to as the head of the system you learned he doesn't adhere to only the step-pull or pivoting only one foot at a time or staying at 100% back weighted. One needs to move about naturally and not be restricted to a particular method of moving or balance. Controlled balanced mobility is far more important than adhering to a particular stance, shift, or stepping method.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Oily Dragon said:


> Such is the way of all Shaolin styles.



BTW, we were taught, that in spite of the origin myths deriving Wing Chun from Southern Shaolin, that in many ways, WC was iconoclastic and went against a lot of that tradition. Examples would be the emphasis on simplicity and directness, shedding complex and low percentage techniques, resulting in fewer techniques, fewer forms, and also a preference (especially in the Ip Man lineage) for naming techniques plainly and forgoing traditional poetic terminology. 

On the other hand, even the rebellious son who leaves home and denies his family, carries his parents with him in his genes. So it is with WC.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2020)

Danny T said:


> Geezer...One needs to move about naturally and not be restricted to a particular method of moving or balance. Controlled balanced mobility is far more important than adhering to a particular stance, shift, or stepping method.



True enough. I just wanted to examine how one particular way of moving ...what's taught in orthodox "WT" ....contributes to power generation.

I find it also true for the "WT" method of turning where you turn one foot at a time in sequence and shift your weight nearly 100% from side to side.. They teach it as a means of shifting the centerline laterally to yield and evade a strong attack "like a bulfighter" dodging a bull. But I find that this method of turning, with one foot always rooted, adducted, almost torqued into the ground really adds to my power generation as compared to the faster methods of pivoting both feet simultaneously.

Here's a very basic demo of the "WT" turning stance showing how only one foot is moved at a time:






When turning like this, I find that the combination to turning and shifting of the weight on to the firmly rooted rear foot lets me access both rising (lifting) and rotational energy to gain power, especially in body punches and uppercuts (lifting punches). I can't get the same feeling turning both feet simultaneously pivoting either on the heels or toes.

The fact is that to turn both feet at the same time means that, for an instant, you are "unrooted" on both sides and that's the difference.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 3, 2020)

geezer said:


> I think I'm missing the point, although many years ago, I hung out.



I'll bet.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 3, 2020)

geezer said:


> BTW, we were taught, that in spite of the origin myths deriving Wing Chun from Southern Shaolin, that in many ways, WC was iconoclastic and went against a lot of that tradition. Examples would be the emphasis on simplicity and directness, shedding complex and low percentage techniques, resulting in fewer techniques, fewer forms, and also a preference (especially in the Ip Man lineage) for naming techniques plainly and forgoing traditional poetic terminology.
> 
> On the other hand, even the rebellious son who leaves home and denies his family, carries his parents with him in his genes. So it is with WC.



I thought you'd be able to point out the connection between Wing Chun and Diu Ma?  If you need me to spell things out, just ask.


----------



## yak sao (Jul 3, 2020)

geezer said:


> If you have a chicken in your pocket, i'd rather not know about it...



Getting dangerously close to a pecker joke


----------



## yak sao (Jul 3, 2020)

I'm of the mindset that in Wing Tsun we learn things in isolation but we apply it as a whole.
Once you obtain all the pieces to the puzzle your picture is complete and you are able to use/apply as the situation dictates.


----------



## O'Malley (Jul 3, 2020)

geezer said:


> Thought I'd backtrack and include this short video for anybody with no idea of what si taught in the "WT" lineage:



Let's say he's in that stance with the right leg forwards, left leg backwards. And he's got 100% of his weight on his back (left) leg.

If he needs to step to the left or step back, he will need to shift his weight again. Or am I missing something here?


----------



## yak sao (Jul 3, 2020)

O'Malley said:


> Let's say he's in that stance with the right leg forwards, left leg backwards. And he's got 100% of his weight on his back (left) leg.
> 
> If he needs to step to the left or step back, he will need to shift his weight again. Or am I missing something here?



It's situational, but generally speaking, the short pulling step is used to cover a short distance, like scooting up under the table.
If you were to go a further distance then the rear leg steps through and the other leg becomes weighted.
Same as in going backwards or to the side opposite the leg that's out.

A good rule of thumb is you step with the same leg you would easiest kick with in a particular instance.
In other words, if the opponent is too far away to kick with the front leg, you would kick with( or step) with the rear leg.
If the left foot is forward and opponent is on your left, you would kick with the left foot using a side kick or facing them and using a front kick...if they were on your right, your right foot would come through in an arcing motion and kick (or step) to the right.

So we don't stay on the back leg completely and scoot around the floor like a doofus,  the legs change position just like walking.

Clear as mud?


----------



## hunschuld (Jul 3, 2020)

First I am not trying to be a jerk and I respect all versions of Wing Chun. I am sure every version believes it is effective. Wing Chun is not a religion for me. It is about what is actually effective and practical for fighting. While many Wing Chun styles may be effective against the untrained or drunks the truth is it is not very effective against trained fighters.
Just look at YouTube,very few effective WC fighters.
This type of footwork and the adherence to it and the justification of it points to the fantasy religion and not the practical fighting skill that was the hall mark of the original wing chun practitioners of the late 1800's.

The question is are WC  people human and do they share in the physical anatomy of all humans? If your answer is yes then this is not the best way to generate power and in fact violates several WC Kuit

Power comes from the ground or the lower body depending on how you look at things. Power generation comes from the connected usage and alignment of the 6 joints ankle.knee,HIP's,shoulder. elbow, wrist. The largest muscles in the human body of in the lower body.

Power generation comes from learning how to transmit the power from the lower body up to and out the hands of the upper body. This is the same for all physical endeavors.

You should be able to take your WC stance and mechanics and apply it to all other activities with minimal changes based on the activity. Olympic lifting, power lifting , golf, tennis ,hitting a baseball, Offensive lineman technique in American Footbal etc etc.In fact using WC mechanics may actually improve your skills in other activities. This stance and foot work locks the hips. The hips must be loose and you must be able to open and close them . The lean back on one leg breaks the link between lower body and the arms.

If you believe Leung Jan was a practitioner of Chinese medicine then this stance and foot work is incorrect for the same reasons. The way the knees are used closes and blocks the inner leg meridians. The meridians along the spine are broken.  A person knowledgeable in Chinese medicine would never do this.

If I am wrong you can prove it. Take this front stance and place your hands behind your back. Have a partner place both hands on your chest  and have them push into your chest as hard as they can. You should be able to take their energy and you should also be able to freely pick up your front leg and perform any kick you wish while maintaining your balance and structure. No Leung Ting tricks of pushing up on the persons elbows as they push into your chest. In Lo Kwai'ss system this is considered a basic SNT level skill

There are 2 energy power generation methods of Ging's in our WC. The first is dog shakes water. The horizontal energy of WC This is the longer range method from used in white crane. It comes from the rapid rotation of the hips and waist area it also triggers the secondary energy usage of the shoulder/ scapula area. When doing a turning punch the power of the retraction of one arm helps to propel the striking arm is an example. Float and Swallow

the second Ging is  snake strikes. Some have said this is from Emei snake style . I have no opinion on the matter. This is the vertical energy. Up from the grounds the hips transmit the energy up along the spine and out the arms. This trigger the sinking energy as its secondary affect. the next strike will trigger the use of the chest area  as your sink or boxers would say drop or use a drop step.. Sink and Spit .

For use the first Kuit is, WC invested by a woman. A woman is not as powerful in the upper body as a man. for her to be successful she must use the muscles of her lower body. Even a small woman's leg is more powerful than a large mans arms.  To do this she must rely on her hips to both transmit out attacking energy and accept ,sink and control incoming energy. The proper use of the hips is all important.and is the basis for all wing chun.

Footwork is to be light and fast move quickly and grind. How can you move to a flank of a boxer,side body if all you do is plod forward?

If I am wrong you should have no problem cleaning up at the nearest MMA school.

If I am am wrong you should see every wing chun   school full of professional MMA fighters learning the footwork.. They want to win fights and will take any edge they can find.to do so.

This is just my position it may not be true for anyone else but when I have had to fight  and when I sparred in a cage. I was not infused with the spirit of Leung  Jan or Yip Man and non of my teachers showed up to protect me. It was just me alone so I was happy I had given myself over to reality and practicality.



.


----------



## geezer (Jul 3, 2020)

_Hunschuld: _I don't think we disagree as much as you may suspect. I moved away from Wing Chun for a while and for a number of years I favored the practical footwork of my old Escrima teacher, Rene Latosa (who I trained with long before his association with the EBMAS group). Latosa's footwork is both quick and powerful, being influenced by his FMA background and his experience as a boxer.

But in spite of my success at applying Latosa's modified boxing footwork, at a certain range I found that the principles of my WT footwork would naturally come into play. So I looked at what I was doing more closely, and have found that there is so much more to it than some would think. 



hunschuld said:


> Footwork is to be light and fast move quickly and grind. How can you move to a flank of a boxer,side body if all you do is plod forward?



The "WT" footwork is_ not _just plodding forward. Properly done, it can be light, it can be quick, it is multi-directional in 360°, it can be evasive, and it can be explosive. I feel that a lot of the misconceptions about it come from the way it has been taught. The various "WT" organizations around the world tend to so stress the most basic drills, and tend to dole out material so slowly that most of what you see is so rudimentary as to be almost unworkable. 

Furthermore, the "official WT" groups I have experienced tend to be very authoritarian and do not encourage the kind of experimentation that is necessary to discover how to bring these principles to life and freely apply them. Some of the EWTO trained people I've met here in the states are especially guilty of this. Like "WT engineers" they have so over-analyzed every detail of a movement, that their students may miss the _synergy_ that comes when all these separate pieces flow together. IMO the older, Chinese trained practitioners seem to be better at that.



hunschuld said:


> ...If I am wrong you should have no problem cleaning up at the nearest MMA school.



For your information, I have never had any trouble _cleaning up _at the MMA or Boxing gyms I've used. 

...At Camelback Boxing and also at Torres DTE/MMA, I used to help store away the pads and equipment, help disinfect the mats, sweep up, ...even carry the trash out to the dumpster. It was always appreciated.


----------



## geezer (Jul 3, 2020)

O'Malley said:


> Let's say he's in that stance with the right leg forwards, left leg backwards. And he's got 100% of his weight on his back (left) leg. If he needs to step to the left or step back, he will need to shift his weight again. Or *am I missing something here?*



^^^^ No, you are not. 

Whenever possible, we prefer angling, turning or off-lining to retreating. But if can't turn and you are pressed back, you step back. ...or if you have to, _jump back! _

I'm presenting a "favored approach" to stance work, not a straight-jacket that will get you killed!  

Similarly, if you are moving forward using the rear-weighted "drag step" and you are moving over rough, uneven ground, your rear foot will often _catch_ on obstructions. Then as you pull forward, your weight automatically shifts forward onto your front leg, allowing you to pick up your rear foot and move it over the obstruction. Its a natural process called  _stepping or walking_. Most of us have been doing it since early childhood. 

The rear-weighted drag-step is something you can move in and out of. More valuable at corta mano than larga. So, personally I maintain a more boxer like stance at long range or with weapons and then may shift into the WT rear-weighted stance when getting inside, especially when empty handed. It's really quite mobile and quick. In some ways, as when you add the turn, it's similar to what you see Pekiti guys doing. It's problems aren't a lack of speed and mobility. IMO it's greatest vulnerability is_ against a grappler. 

_


----------



## hunschuld (Jul 5, 2020)

_"Hunschuld: _I don't think we disagree as much as you may suspect." Geezer I am sure you are right. Since we are all built the same I believe we all naturally will drift toward methods that best fit our anatomy.

 I started WC in 1983 and went through and was exposed to the same way of thinking as everyone else. This is better than that. My teacher was closer to Yip Man etc. I started when things were still old school including blind folded full contact Chi Sao. I always learned best by getting hit and I was stubborn. I did some crazy things to test my WC against other trained Fighters of other methods . I believed WC was designed to work so for example when a boxer would smack me or a BJJ guy took me down I felt the problem was with what I had been taught not with WC itself so I looked for answers and have experience with many teachers and styles of wing chun.  My only experience with LTWC was with a couple of people that made a big deal of spending time training at the "castle". I was impressed with the marketing skills.

For me we all have the same basic techniques the differences are based on the internal structural use of the body and what parts of WC in emphasized. For example my WC and everyone's forms are full of grappling and throwing techniques yet most WC has been reduced to a primary focus on striking.There are reasons for this change. The other problem if a primary misunderstanding of  Chi Sao.


----------



## geezer (Jul 5, 2020)

hunschuld said:


> For example my WC and *everyone's forms are full of grappling and throwing techniques* yet most WC has been reduced to a primary focus on striking.There are reasons for this change. The other problem if *a primary misunderstanding of  Chi Sao*.



Hmmm. Two excellent topics for a new thread and further discussion: 

...everyone's forms are full of grappling and throwing techniques....

...the other problem is a primary misunderstanding of Chi Sao.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 5, 2020)

hunschuld said:


> my WC and everyone's forms are full of grappling and throwing techniques ...


Could you explain what kind of throwing techniques exist in your WC form?


----------



## hunschuld (Jul 5, 2020)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Could you explain what kind of throwing techniques exist in your WC form?



Very hard question. Much easier to show than to type full explanations.

Tung Sheng Chang said in an interview maybe 35 years ago that he found all styles of Kung Fu had Shuai jiao in their forms and he spent a lot of time showing Masters the Shuai jiao inside their forms. It no different for WC For example the very first thing you learn, the stance opening, is a standing knee lock and a throw that will break the knee. The downward palm section of SNT side ,back front. . That whole section is how to deal with the clinch. One of the most brutal throws is the double tok sau..

It just keeps going on Chum Kui and the Dummy contain the most information. I will admit our dummy has 8 sections that Yip Man may not have taught. I have never seen the sections in any other dummy form. It is full of leg cutting, sweeps, whipping and driving throws.

The key to training starts with the 1 leg SNT and then learning defense against sweeps and throws.I was told one of the reasons the sweeping and throwing stopped being emphasized
was that they caused to many injuries and were hard to train.Don't know that I believe that. Their are other more selfish reasons that I think are closer to the truth.For example from stories Yip Man used Kneeling horse in a fight yet you don't see it in most versions of his WC. The throws tend to trap the arms so break falling is difficult and often the goal is to bounce the back of the head off the ground.

One example is when in Chi Sao you arrow step through the other persons legs and hook a leg while your upper body attacks keeps driving through putting your opponent right on the back of their head. Wing Chun throws are not nearly as comprehensive as Shuai jiao. They are a subset that work with WC principals and flow with WC hand techniques.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 5, 2020)

hunschuld said:


> the stance opening, is a standing knee lock ...


I'm glad you have pointed this out. You can use WC YJKYM to lock behind your opponent's ankle, and use your shin bone to press on the inside or outside of your opponent's leg to cause a "biting" motion. The lower that you can drop your knee, the strong biting motion that you can perform.

I believe some WC systems still train this kind of "sticky leg".







Does this posture look similar to the WC YJKYM?


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

hunschuld said:


> Very hard question. Much easier to show than to type full explanations.



^^^ This is so true. But thanks for giving it a go anyway.



hunschuld said:


> ....One of the most brutal throws is the double tok sau.



Some of the sweeps and throws you described sound similar to things I've seen, but this, using double tok sau, as a _brutal throw _doesn't sound like anything I'm familiar with. _Could you elaborate?_



hunschuld said:


> ...It just keeps going on Chum Kui and the Dummy contain the most information. I will admit our dummy has 8 sections that Yip Man may not have taught. I have never seen the sections in any other dummy form. It is full of leg cutting, sweeps, whipping and driving throws.



Fascinating. The dummy seems like a very good tool for practicing this kind of work.



hunschuld said:


> ....example is when in Chi Sao you arrow step through the other persons legs and hook a leg while your upper body attacks keeps driving through putting your opponent right on the back of their head. Wing Chun throws are not nearly as comprehensive as Shuai jiao. They are a subset that work with WC principals and flow with WC hand techniques.



We do practice something like you describe above, but like you said, in general the Ip Man lineage WC/VT/WT I've seen emphasizes striking far more than throwing. Emin was fond of standing knee / leg locks, kind of like the "shin bite" John Wang showed, but delivered from an upright WT posture. Those techniques _can_ be dangerous and due to already damaged knees and ankles, I avoid them. Not that they aren't good techniques ....just that they aren't good for _me. _Anyway, the old saying is that all arts train _ti da shuai na._ Why should Wing Chun be different?

Here's an old clip of _Wang Zhi-Peng._ At 1:15 he says he will show us how _ti da shuai na_ all work together in his VT and then starting from a poon sau platform proceeds to thrash the heck out of his student. I believe this is his own re-introduction of shuai chiao into the mostly striking oriented Ip Man / Wong Shun Leung lineage he trained:


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

BTW, reading threads like this with the great input by _Hunschuld  _and John Wang, I find myself daydreaming and imagining a utopian world in which Wing Chun practitioners would openly exchange information. A world where WC/VT/WT and even JKD guys, etc. with a particular skill would travel and offer _open_ seminars to share their knowledge. So, for example, you might go to open seminars on subjects like, "Integrating Sweeps and Throws into your WC", or "Grappling and Escapes for WC", or "Different Approaches to Power Generation in WC", or.... 

...In short, a world where WC people were more interested in sharing and developing practical skills than perpetuating the cult of their linage and sifu.


----------



## Poppity (Jul 6, 2020)

geezer said:


> BTW, reading threads like this with the great input by _Hunschuld  _and John Wang, I find myself daydreaming and imagining a utopian world in which Wing Chun practitioners would openly exchange information. A world where WC/VT/WT and even JKD guys, etc. with a particular skill would travel and offer _open_ seminars to share their knowledge. So, for example, you might go to open seminars on subjects like, "Integrating Sweeps and Throws into your WC", or "Grappling and Escapes for WC", or "Different Approaches to Power Generation in WC", or....
> 
> ...In short, a world where WC people were more interested in sharing and developing practical skills than perpetuating the cult of their linage and sifu.



I am tempted to do a body snatchers point and "screee...." At this clear blasphemy.

But in the interest of sharing I found an old clip of my sifu doing takedowns on YouTube. I appreciate that bending the back is not in every lineage of wing chun, but it's in ours and certainly the gulao style.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 6, 2020)

The wing chun I've learned has numerous takedowns, sweeps, trips, throws utilizing the legs (chi gerk) for leveraging, hooking, sweeping. Kick and knee strikes are used for entries into the trips and sweeps as well.


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

Snark said:


> I appreciate that *bending the back* is not in every lineage of wing chun, but it's in ours and certainly the gulao style.



We normally keep the spine straight, but _flexible_. So yeah, we will flex the spine and bend with the energy we receive, but we would not normally bend back of our own volition. That also figures into the principle expressed in the last movement of our Biu Tze form.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 6, 2020)

*


geezer said:



			we would not normally bend back of our own volition.
		
Click to expand...

The backward bending with toes push kick is a good technique to counter any punch.

The leg is longer than the arm.











*


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

Danny T said:


> The wing chun I've learned has numerous takedowns, sweeps, trips, throws utilizing the legs (chi gerk) for leveraging, hooking, sweeping. Kick and knee strikes are used for entries into the trips and sweeps as well.



We seem to train something similar, and I have a few sweeps, trips, throws, and counters I feel very comfortable with, but I'm always interested in how others approach these things. 

Overall, I'd describe our lineage as more of a "narrowly focused art" with a bit of the "less is more" approach.  We emphasize just a handful of sweeps, trips, and throws that we use pretty often, with a variety of entries or set-ups from chi-sau or clinch range. Other arts may be more "broadly focused" and include a much wider range of techniques.

On a separate note: I'm feeling a bit rusty with this stuff since 1. nobody really wants to train in close or in clinch range in these_ Covidious_ times, and 2. since we moved out of the studio last year, we don't have access to quality matts. The thin puzzle matts in the garage we use don't really cut it for me any more. Hitting 65 in a couple of weeks, and feeling the years in my joints and back.


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> *The backward bending with toes push kick is a good technique to counter any punch.
> 
> The leg is longer than the arm.
> 
> ...


Looking at the second image, the GIF. Would't throwing the _hips forward_ be more functional than throwing the shoulders back and leaning backward? What am I missing?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 6, 2020)

geezer said:


> Looking at the second image, the GIF. Would't throwing the _hips forward_ be more functional than throwing the shoulders back and leaning backward? What am I missing?


For offense, the backward leaning can help you to change a heel kick into a toes push kick. You use body leaning forward heel kick first. After the contact, you then change your heel kick into a toes push kick by leaning your body backward. This way, you can deliver 2 consecutive kicks into your opponent's body one after another.

In one Kung Fu movie, the guy delivered 4 consecutive strikes:

- finger jab.
- knuckle punch,
- fist punch,
- palm heel strike.

The 4 consecutive strikes may only exist in a movie. But the 2 consecutive kicks (heel kick, toes push kick) truly exist in CMA long fist system 3rd road Pao Quan.

For defense, if you kick out earlier, you don't need to lean back that much. If your opponent fist almost reaches to your face, you have to lean back to dodge that punch (for defense).


----------



## hunschuld (Jul 6, 2020)

Some of the sweeps and throws you described sound similar to things I've seen, but this, using double tok sau, as a _brutal throw _doesn't sound like anything I'm familiar with. _Could you elaborate?

Double tok  throw is really for only 1 situation. When you have been clinched with a Muay Tai plum control or something similar. The only time I ever used it was while sparring at a MMA school 22 years ago. I hit it on a person bigger and stronger than me ,he was either 6'4 or 6'5  and we were wearing head gear but he was knocked cold for over a minute. I was told he landed on the side of his head. Scared me so much I have only taught it three times since then and have not used it since. 

I only mention it because of my health status and since my children don't want to learn I don't want everything to disappear when I go. There is a mellow version and the nasty version. The movement relies on you ability to use your hips in the snake fashion and tok's up and forward under the elbows. Timing is also important. You must hit it right after they lock in to have the best effect._


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 6, 2020)

yak sao said:


> It's situational, but generally speaking, the short pulling step is used to cover a short distance, like scooting up under the table.
> If you were to go a further distance then the rear leg steps through and the other leg becomes weighted.
> Same as in going backwards or to the side opposite the leg that's out.
> 
> ...



You nailed it.  Scoot is the perfect word for the Diu Ma Shuffle. 上, 雙, 吊, 屌.

The connection between Seung Ma, Seurng Ma, and Diu Ma is that once again, nobody expects the Chinese Homophonism!  

From stepping stance, to two stepping stance, to false cat leg stance that transforms onto a lethal Golden chicken.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Jul 6, 2020)

hunschuld said:


> Just look at YouTube,very few effective WC fighters.
> .



Any kind of kung fu is really, really, really hard to get effective at, otherwise it wouldn't be called kung fu.

Have you seen all the garbage on Youtube?  It gets harder every day to find anything good there.


----------



## geezer (Jul 6, 2020)

Now for all the people who insist that the "WT" back weighted advancing step is impractical and unnatural, I have a clip showing that even our four-legged friends use it:






From now on this classical stepping method shall be known as "Dog wipes his as..."


----------



## yak sao (Jul 7, 2020)

geezer said:


> Now for all the people who insist that the "WT" back weighted advancing step is impractical and unnatural, I have a clip showing that even our four-legged friends use it:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Someone beat you to it


----------



## Danny T (Jul 7, 2020)

geezer said:


> We seem to train something similar, and I have a few sweeps, trips, throws, and counters I feel very comfortable with, but I'm always interested in how others approach these things.
> 
> Overall, I'd describe our lineage as more of a "narrowly focused art" with a bit of the "less is more" approach.  We emphasize just a handful of sweeps, trips, and throws that we use pretty often, with a variety of entries or set-ups from chi-sau or clinch range. Other arts may be more "broadly focused" and include a much wider range of techniques.
> 
> On a separate note: I'm feeling a bit rusty with this stuff since 1. nobody really wants to train in close or in clinch range in these_ Covidious_ times, and 2. since we moved out of the studio last year, we don't have access to quality matts. The thin puzzle matts in the garage we use don't really cut it for me any more. Hitting 65 in a couple of weeks, and feeling the years in my joints and back.


"Overall, I'd describe our lineage as more of a "narrowly focused art" with a bit of the "less is more" approach."
I can agree with this within my training up to the Biu Jee. Here we focus first on form and presentation then a lot of play and experimentation as to how you (the individual) use the movements, postures, & skills for application. Again during the weapons training the focus, at first, is the form and presentation then experimentation. During these phases we spar, a lot and my sifu pushes us strongly if not already training in other systems to do so. In fact, in order to become a full instructor under him you are required to have advanced into high levels of at least 2 completely different martial systems. Not so much to become say a Muay Thai fighter or instructor but to truly understand your wing chun and use it vs a real boxer or nak muay, or bjj/wrestler.


----------



## geezer (Jul 7, 2020)

Danny T said:


> ...In fact, in order to become a full instructor under him you are required to have advanced into high levels of at least 2 completely different martial systems...



This is very different from the old school Chinese thinking, according to which you chose a good school, work hard and impress your sifu enough to be allowed to do _bai si _and become his disciple, then you study his art, not others.

...or is it _really_ so different? Every one of those old masters had a functional knowledge of other systems ...often picked up on the sly, testing their arts with friends from other lineages or systems. My old sifu insisted that _his _art was complete and the only art we should study or teach.

And yet many times in the early years, in private, he would let down his guard and demonstrate bits of Hung Gar, Choi Li Fut, Karate, and Judo. Definitely more than you could learn without having practiced.

Many have speculated that Yip Man similarly practiced and exchanged knowledge with others to further develop his technique, but because of this traditional approach where you would not "betray" your lineage, he used the "Leung Bic" story to cover for any changes he made and in this way allowed his old instructor and Si-Dai, Ng Chun So, to save face. He may also have learned actual material from Leung Bic. I don't know.

Anyway, I suppose I reflect contemporary Western culture when I say that your sifu's openness makes a whole lot of sense to me. Heck, maybe not even Western culture. John Wang also seems to favor learning several arts.


----------



## yak sao (Jul 7, 2020)

I came to WT having trained another kung fu system for a number of years and while it was a bit of a hindrance early on with unlearning old habits it became a plus in helping my students and me to learn how to deal with attacks outside of WT.

Emin used to refer to only training WT vs WT as martial incest.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 7, 2020)

geezer said:


> John Wang also seems to favor learning several arts.


The term "style" has no meaning to me. My goal is to add another

- tool,
- method/principle/strategy,

into my toolbox.

To use WC Tang Shou to protect my center from inside out is what make me interest in WC.

When I see somebody who can do something special, I will ask myself, "Can I do it?"


----------



## geezer (Jul 7, 2020)

Thinking about Hunschuld and Danny talking about leg-sweeps and throws in WC/WT/VT. I liked this paricular response to someone wiping your front kick aside with _gwat sau_ and stepping inside. Counter with a downward chopping kick (a sort of _oi moon_ _gaun gherk_) behind the knee. Sweet! See 2:50 - 3:35 below:






Other similar responses: at a little longer range you can stomp down onto his foot or, at a little closer range, stomp down into a _huen bo_ (as you turn to recover center) and sweep out the ankle.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jul 7, 2020)

Can you believe that the WC Bong Shou has already been used in Chinese wrestling?






The WC double Tan Shou can be used to set up head lock nicely.


----------



## geezer (Jul 7, 2020)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The term "style" has no meaning to me. My goal is to add another tool, method/ principle/ strategy, into my toolbox.
> ...When I see somebody who can do something special, I will ask myself, "Can I do it?"



These days, there's a lot I can't physically do like I used to. At least not at a truly functional level. So sometimes it's enough to understand how things integrate and share them with students and friends. More of a coach and less of a participant. 

BTW you are older than I am and seem to still have it going. Awesome! It's an inspiration for me to get off my butt and stop making excuses.


----------



## geezer (Jul 7, 2020)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Can you believe that the WC Bong Shou has already been used in Chinese wrestling?



1. Yes I can absolutely believe that, especially if you include a _bong-sau_ compressing into _lan-sau_ or even _gwai-jarn_. Sure.  But....
2. I wouldn't call that "bong-sau" shaped technique in the GIF you provided a WC _bong sau_ ...at least as I understand it. Similar shape, entirely different energy and function.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 7, 2020)

geezer said:


> This is very different from the old school Chinese thinking, according to which you chose a good school, work hard and impress your sifu enough to be allowed to do _bai si _and become his disciple, then you study his art, not others.
> 
> ...or is it _really_ so different? Every one of those old masters had a functional knowledge of other systems ...often picked up on the sly, testing their arts with friends from other lineages or systems. My old sifu insisted that _his _art was complete and the only art we should study or teach.
> 
> ...


"you study his art, not others. 
...or is it really so different? Every one of those old masters had a functional knowledge of other systems"

Yep. My sifu had trained in Judo and TKD prior to training wing chun. He also trained in boxing, muay thai, kali, JKD, tai chi, and dabbled in several other systems just to get a feel for them. He also has quite a bit of firearms training and police tactical training. As to my Sigung Jiu Wan, Sifu Fong says he knew more than wing chun but has never expounded on it even when asked other than he was a police officer in both Foshan and Hong Kong. He also doesn't talk much about his training other than to say they did a lot of drills & chi sao and that they went out on the streets to get into fights. There were a lot of gangs that fought a lot against each other. Jiu Wan would fuss angrily about them fighting but then would want to know what happen and if they lost a fight worked them hard so they'd not lose again. Anyway I don't buy much into most of the old masters having only one instructor and training in only one thing.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 9, 2020)

Snark said:


> I appreciate that bending the back is not in every lineage of wing chun, but it's in ours and certainly the gulao style.



Mine too.


----------



## Poppity (Jul 9, 2020)

wckf92 said:


> Mine too.



That's very interesting. If you don't mind me asking whats the stem of your branch of wing chun?


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 9, 2020)

Snark said:


> That's very interesting. If you don't mind me asking whats the stem of your branch of wing chun?



Duncan Leung branch. As someone else mentioned the backwards bend is towards the end of bil jee form. One use of it is to lean back to generate more power and range during certain movements. Hope that makes sense(?)


----------



## Poppity (Jul 11, 2020)

wckf92 said:


> Duncan Leung branch. As someone else mentioned the backwards bend is towards the end of bil jee form. One use of it is to lean back to generate more power and range during certain movements. Hope that makes sense(?)


Thanks !


----------

