How the punch can relate to the rest of the system

[Gerry Seymour]

The issue is if you are used to isolate your arm from your body, you will develop bad habit and you will need time to remove that bad habit later on.

IMO, just by using "turning stance" is far from enough. You will need:

- rotate your body,
- bend your leg and then straight your leg.

I have to agree with you on this one. I've had to help students (including my wife) fix this exact error (different art, same problems, sometimes). Somehow, she learned the arm mechanics and failed to put the proper power generation with them. When I became her instructor, we started working on making it a full punch. She still struggles with the habit. When punching down, for instance (what I call a "drop punch" because you can simply drop body weight into it), she still tends to keep her body stable and punch downwards. Because she starts at an appropriate distance for a correct punch, she is often too far away for this incomplete punch. It's taking real effort for her to correct this ingrained mistake.

I don't know how WC instructors avoid building this bad habit if they start by teaching "arm only", beyond a single training session. (For some people, it is easiest to learn the limb movement without the body, but I only use that for the very first session on a given strike.) I assume they must have some tool in their bag that helps make the transition.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, since you asked!

Perhaps folks think of it as lacking mobility because they're thinking of moving while staying in the stance?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Though this is interesting I do not see how anyone can be rooted bouncing up and down like that....basically he is moving his center of gravity up, thus uprooting himself, and the result is no solid foundation, which is the cornerstone of Wing Chun.

I read those movements more as him going from what I'd call "high neutral" and dropping weight into movements then returning to a "high neutral", rather than being in a basic stance and bouncing out of it. The idea of a "high neutral" stance is that weight can be settled in it, or you can drop weight to add rooting/power depending upon the need. The "high neutral" is generally more mobile and has more immediate options, without sacrificing connection to the ground.

 

[KPM]

I
I don't know how WC instructors avoid building this bad habit if they start by teaching "arm only", beyond a single training session. (For some people, it is easiest to learn the limb movement without the body, but I only use that for the very first session on a given strike.) I assume they must have some tool in their bag that helps make the transition.

Wing Chun teaching sometimes uses the "hammer and nail" analogy. Putting the body behind a punch is analogous to hitting the nail (punching arm) with a hammer (body). If you haven't learned to line up the "nail" properly, then trying to hit it isn't going to help very much! And since Wing Chun uses a pretty specific body structure as the "hammer", this is typically not something learned in just a couple of lessons. So most teachers will make sure the student has a good understanding of the basic punch before they allow them to start trying to use the body to add power. That is why the SNT form has no footwork and no pivoting. Traditionally the student would stay on the SNT form for a good amount of time before progressing to the CK form...which has the footwork/pivoting and therefore starts to teach use of the body. Another factor to consider is that at close range Wing Chun often punches or strikes without significant use of the body. Therefore making sure a good punch is developed from the beginning and then adding body power later is the preferred method.

I'll also say that Pin Sun Wing Chun puts far more emphasis on use of body power than any of the Ip Man systems I have experienced. Many Ip Man versions seem to hardly use any body power at all other than simply stepping in with the punch. I actually heard the "hammer and nail" analogy first from a Sum Nung Wing Chun friend many years ago.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Well, since you asked!

Thanks for sharing your personal clip. Mobility is a relative term and not an absolute term.

Let's look into YJKYM a bit deeper. Since you are standing square, you don't have the separation of

- leading leg, and
- back leg.

This means that if you want to move in, you have to move either the right leg, or the left leg. In both cases, the distance between you and your opponent will change.

Compare YJKYM with 4-6 stance (40% weight on front, 60% weight on back), the 4-6 stance has leading leg and back leg. When you move your

- leading leg, the distance between you and your opponent will change. This is the same as YJKYM.
- back leg, the distance between you and your opponent remain the same. This is a very important function. You can move your back leg forward to touch your leading leg. When you do that, since the distance between you and your opponent remains the same, your opponent may not notice it. You can then "spring" forward from there. All the jumping kicks are using the same footwork. The YJKYM just doesn't have this function.

Here is an example that you can use a "4-6 stance" to "hide your preparation for springing forward" by moving your back leg to touch your leading leg. If you can hide your preparation well, your sudden attack will be fast and surprised.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Though this is interesting I do not see how anyone can be rooted bouncing up and down like that....basically he is moving his center of gravity up, thus uprooting himself, and the result is no solid foundation, which is the cornerstone of Wing Chun.

You will need to move your body up and down to generate power.

纵鹤拳——三战_鶴拳 - 56.com

纵鹤拳 1 [房祥麟演练]—在线播放—优酷网，视频高清在线观看

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I read those movements more as him going from what I'd call "high neutral" and dropping weight into movements then returning to a "high neutral", rather than being in a basic stance and bouncing out of it. The idea of a "high neutral" stance is that weight can be settled in it, or you can drop weight to add rooting/power depending upon the need. The "high neutral" is generally more mobile and has more immediate options, without sacrificing connection to the ground.

I had learned the basic punching drill during my 1st day of my long fist training.

1. Start from a low horse stance.
2. Turn body to my left, straight both legs, punch right fist out, my left shoulder, chest, right shoulder, right arm are all in a perfect straight line.
3. Drop back to low horse stance as 1.
4. Turn body to my right, straight both legs, punch left fist out, my right shoulder, chest, left shoulder, left arm are all in a perfect straight line.
5. Back to 1.

In the entire training, my feet are not moving. My body are turning and also go up and down. The interested thing is I can train this punching drill "with my arms behind my back".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Wing Chun teaching sometimes uses the "hammer and nail" analogy. Putting the body behind a punch is analogous to hitting the nail (punching arm) with a hammer (body).

You are talking about "body chases arm" method. Just like to stab a sword, you don't use much force to stab. The moment that your sword touch on your opponent's body, the moment that you add force into it and put your body behind your sword.

I do agree that this method is much harder to train then the "body pushes arm" method. IMO, if 10 persons can achieve power generation by using the "body pushes arm" method, may be there are only 1 or 2 persons can achieve power generation by using the "body chases arm" method.

 

[KPM]

Compare YJKYM with 4-6 stance (40% weight on front, 60% weight on back), the 4-6 stance has leading leg and back leg. When you move your

- leading leg, the distance between you and your opponent will change. This is the same as YJKYM.
- back leg, the distance between you and your opponent remain the same. This is a very important function. You can move your back leg forward to touch your leading leg. When you do that, since the distance between you and your opponent remains the same, your opponent may not notice it. You can then "spring" forward from there. All the jumping kicks are using the same footwork. The YJKYM just doesn't have this function.

I agree with you John! I use that kind of step all the time! I use a "front stance"...."Biu Ma"...whatever you want to call it regularly. I was just pointing out that one CAN move quickly from the YGKYM, and to say that it limits one's mobility is wrong when you know how to use it!

 

[KPM]

You are talking about "body chases arm" method. Just like to stab a sword, you don't use much force to stab. The moment that your sword touch on your opponent's body, the moment that you add force into it and put your body behind your sword.

I do agree that this method is much harder to train then the "body pushes arm" method. IMO, if 10 persons can achieve power generation by using the "body pushes arm" method, may be there are only 1 or 2 persons can achieve power generation by using the "body chases arm" method.

True! But I'm not sure its as hard as you make it out to be! If the "body pushes arm" method is over-done, it ends up being very telegraphic. Like a boxer that "winds up" before the punch. If the "body chases arm" is over-done, it can look very stiff and be hard to do as you point out. Reality is somewhere in the middle. The arm is already in motion when the body is engaged, but not really like a fencing thrust. Its more like "popping a towel" during gym class!

But in another video I did, I showed that one way to train this is to put palms flat on the wooden dummy with arms extended and then "hit" the dummy with your body without lifting the palms off of it. Probably very similar to the training you described as hitting with the arms behind your back.

 

[anerlich]

Well, since you asked!

I can't really argue with any of that.

I will say that my instructor's academy spends much less time practising in YGKYM than most.

This was from my instructor noticing that in most tournaments he attended, those who tried to employ a parallel stance, including the side on / side neutral stance, while fighting, when met with incoming pressure, either ended up getting driven back into the ropes at a rate of knots, or they dropped one foot back into a front stance.

I would also say, that you can attack from here, but it is NOT the best stance from which to deal with force coming at you. You can *maybe* get good at channelling the force into the ground and whatnot, but that's just getting good at coping with an inefficient base and is arguably something of a stunt. it's much easier and more effective just to take a step back and set an effective base.

If grappling with someone, I'm always looking for inside control with one foot forward. If he is standing with feet parallel (please! please!) while I have inside control, he has to shift his weight to move, and when he does that's the time to unbalance him.

 

[KPM]

I can't really argue with any of that.

I will say that my instructor's academy spends much less time practising in YGKYM than most.

This was from my instructor noticing that in most tournaments he attended, those who tried to employ a parallel stance, including the side on / side neutral stance, while fighting, when met with incoming pressure, either ended up getting driven back into the ropes at a rate of knots, or they dropped one foot back into a front stance.

I would also say, that you can attack from here, but it is NOT the best stance from which to deal with force coming at you. You can *maybe* get good at channelling the force into the ground and whatnot, but that's just getting good at coping with an inefficient base and is arguably something of a stunt. it's much easier and more effective just to take a step back and set an effective base.

If grappling with someone, I'm always looking for inside control with one foot forward. If he is standing with feet parallel (please! please!) while I have inside control, he has to shift his weight to move, and when he does that's the time to unbalance him.

Likewise, I wouldn't argue with any of that! Like I noted in the video, at any kind of distance from the opponent a front stance is definitely preferred. And being able to drop one foot back into a front stance when needed is part of being mobile in the YGKYM. I know some people in TWC actually call that a "relief step." To me, and I think this comes through when I am thumping away on B.O.B. in the video, someone should be moving around dynamically....sometimes square, sometimes pivoted or "side on" and sometimes stepping in or through the opponent. My simple objection is when someone says that the YGKYM is "only" a training stance, is too immobile, and is not used in fighting. I feel that if YGKYM is truly the "mother stance", then one should be passing through it and making use of it on a regular basis...even if only a momentary transition.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I do agree that if you decide to guard your ground, no matter what may happen, you don't want to step back for even 1 inch, YGKYM is a good stance to use and your both arms can punch equally. As far as move forward and backward fast, other stances are more suitable.

If you watch the slow motion clip, you can see 2 different foot works are used here:

1. Move your back leg forward and make it front leg. This is a big step and can cover a lot of distance.
2. Move your back leg to touch your leading leg, you the move your leading leg forward. This is like a "skip" step that can hide your intention.

Through this footwork training, you can use either method at any time fast and smoothly without thinking. There is a reason that YGKYM is not used here.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You can train "Tan Shou" and "forward pressure" at the same time as showing in this clip.

 

[KPM]

If you watch the slow motion clip, you can see 2 different foot works are used here:

1. Move your back leg forward and make it front leg. This is a big step and can cover a lot of distance.
2. Move your back leg to touch your leading leg, you the move your leading leg forward. This is like a "skip" step that can hide your intention.

Through this footwork training, you can use either method at any time fast and smoothly without thinking. There is a reason that YGKYM is not used here.

Well of course! When you are doing continuous forward stepping why would you pause in YGKYM? But that doesn't mean that YGKYM is immobile. Everything has its place!

 

[wckf92]

You will need to move your body up and down to generate power.

纵鹤拳——三战_鶴拳 - 56.com

纵鹤拳 1 [房祥麟演练]—在线播放—优酷网，视频高清在线观看

and/or....side to side as in turning horse.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

and/or....side to side as in turning horse.

Yes! If you just punch one arm, you can turn.

 

[geezer]

Yes! If you just punch one arm, you can turn.

I might have heard this from an Alan Orr clip? No matter, I'm sure it didn't originate with him. Anyway, whoever it was, they stated that in WC there are really just four ways to put body into punching power: Sink, rise, turn, and press forward, or a combination of these. All the rest are details that contribute.

Sink = any time you drop weight into your punch, with or without stepping. When stepping, it is coordinated with the movement of the front foot.

Rise = lifting up from a sunken or neutral position, with or without a step. When stepping it is coordinated with the back foot which brings the body mass forward. Also with straightening the spine.

Turn/torque = rotational force added with or without an actual stance turn.

Press forward = usually combined with a step.

Note: In good WT/VT economy of motion is stressed, and these movements may be subtle. Advanced practitioners often apply the above methods generating considerable power from very small body movements ...an almost invisible sink or rise, or adding torque from an almost imperceptible flex of the torso rather than a full turn, or forward pressure from a mere "pulse" forward or perhaps a step of a couple of centimeters.

Also, often you might combine several of these at once. For example either rising or dropping can be combined with turning and pressing to yield respectively either upward or downward, forward spiraling force. Add to this the precise kinetic linkages involved, distancing, timing, and targeting to maximize effect ...and is it any wonder something so conceptually simple is hard to pull off? Anyway it's still hard for me to pull it off! But when you see someone who can do this effectively and consistently it is pretty amazing.

No wonder it looks like some kind of wu-xia magic to the rest of us. And then you start getting all those (heaven help us) Hendrickian expanations!

 

[geezer]

BTW, I've found that the same four factors listed above apply equally in the Escrima I practice. And that's heavily influenced by boxing. So I'm pretty sure this isn't stricktly some kinda mystical Chinese kung-fooey stuff. I'm betting it's just physics. Can't be sure though, since unfortunately, I don't know physics.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

BTW, I've found that the same four factors listed above apply equally in the Escrima I practice. And that's heavily influenced by boxing. So I'm pretty sure this isn't stricktly some kinda mystical Chinese kung-fooey stuff. I'm betting it's just physics. Can't be sure though, since unfortunately, I don't know physics.

LOL. I suspect you know the most frightening kind of physics - applied physics.

I was thinking these through, and I need to get to a heavy bag. I think I use all of these, though the primary power generation I teach is a combination of pressing and turning.