How the punch can relate to the rest of the system

[APL76]

Agree! That's the best strategy. Don't play your opponent's circular game. Take control back, and force him to play your game. If your opponent tries to step to your right, you can step in your right leg to the outside of his left leading leg. This way you have just interrupted his circular footwork.

that might be fine however the way we would try to do it is to cut the person off mid step straight through their middle which, if they are stepping to the side, will mean their stance is weak on that angle (and ungrounded due to the stepping). If you get your timing right it can be difficult for a person to defend themselves well since they are mid step and even harder to recover if you keep the pressure on, or send them flying backwards.

 

[Juany118]

that might be fine however the way we would try to do it is to cut the person off mid step straight through their middle which, if they are stepping to the side, will mean their stance is weak on that angle (and ungrounded due to the stepping). If you get your timing right it can be difficult for a person to defend themselves well since they are mid step and even harder to recover if you keep the pressure on, or send them flying backwards.

Again as @gpseymour pointed out, a very Aiki principle adapted to a striking context. This is what really made WC "click" for me. It is a striking art but it is "soft".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

to cut the person off mid step straight through their middle which, if they are stepping to the side, will mean their stance is weak on that angle (and ungrounded due to the stepping).

This is why when your opponent tries to move to your left "side door" (blind side), he should move his back foot first. When he moves his back foot, his base is getting wider and his balance is getting stronger. It's hard to "run him down" at that moment. If he then quickly moves his leading foot, he can get the "angle" that he wants and reduces his risk to the minimum.

I had a serious argument on this subject with Bagua people before. When a Bagua guy tries to move toward your "side door", he will move his leading leg first. If you charge in while he is moving his leading leg, you can crash him down.

 

[APL76]

Again as @gpseymour pointed out, a very Aiki principle adapted to a striking context. This is what really made WC "click" for me. It is a striking art but it is "soft".

I know nothing about aikido or aikijujutsu etc but from the little I have had exposure to it appears to me that it shares many similarities with the wing chun I learned, especially in terms of handling force.

 

[APL76]

This is why when your opponent tries to move to your left "side door" (blind side), he should move his back foot first. When he moves his back foot, the distance between you and him has not changed yet. If you can't reach to his leading leg before, you still can't reach to his leading leg now. If he then quickly moves his leading foot, he can get the "angle" that he wants and reduces his risk to the minimum.

I had a serious argument on this subject with Bagua people before. When a Bagua guy tries to move toward your "side door", he will move his leading leg first. If you charge in while he is moving his leading leg, you can crash him down.

[/QUOTE

if you know chi gurk (assuming you have done the training to apply it) and someone crosses their legs up like that they should be finished.

 

[APL76]

don't know why it isn't working. anyway

if you know chi gurk (assuming you have done the training to apply it) and someone crosses their legs up like that they should be finished.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

if you know chi gurk (assuming you have done the training to apply it) and someone crosses their legs up like that they should be finished.

After you have moved your back foot for "1 foot", you should only move your leading foot for "3 inch". This way, you will never cross your legs in front of your opponent.

 

[Juany118]

I know nothing about aikido or aikijujutsu etc but from the little I have had exposure to it appears to me that it shares many similarities with the wing chun I learned, especially in terms of handling force.

It is indeed If you can get past the vision of "stereotypical" Aikido with the uke (attacker) doing sloppy attacks and simply "flopping" regardless of the nage's (attacked) form. Some Aikidoka would deny it as well since the idea of going on offense is against their view. The Yoshinkan Aikido I studied however is not "above" offense however, hence why some in the larger community sometimes refer to that school, half jokingly, as being populated by "evil Aikidoka."

 

[APL76]

It is indeed If you can get past the vision of "stereotypical" Aikido with the uke (attacker) doing sloppy attacks and simply "flopping" regardless of the nage's (attacked) form. Some Aikidoka would deny it as well since the idea of going on offense is against their view. The Yoshinkan Aikido I studied however is not "above" offense however, hence why some in the larger community sometimes refer to that school, half jokingly, as being populated by "evil Aikidoka."

I have always wondered about that. Given that when we do wing chun we take care not to give anyone force of our own to manipulate, and try to manipulate any force an opponent might give us I have always wondered how aikido might deal with you if you don’t present them force to take? (that is with my naïve assumption that the Aikido I have seen seems to require an opponent to give them some force to take)

 

[APL76]

After you have moved your back foot for "1 foot", you should only move your leading foot for "3 inch". This way, you will never cross your legs in front of your opponent.

if you encounter someone who really knows how to deploy wing chun to its fullest extent combining the handling of force with sticky hands and sticky legs you can hardly even stand up much less fight back, they will take control of your balance, if they want you to cross your legs you will, or you will simply go over. I have felt it done by my sifu; the only thing I can think of to describe it is that I imagine its what it would be like to be a human marionette puppet with someone controlling your arms and legs centre of gravity etc.. when I have felt that I realised that once someone who can do it has contact on arm and leg, even if they aren't hitting you, you are done. For a person of that level making you cross your legs is nothing.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

if you encounter someone who really knows how to deploy wing chun to its fullest extent ...

You can replace "xyz" to any MA system, it will apply as well.

"if you encounter someone who really knows how to deploy "xyz" to its fullest extent ..."

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Again as @gpseymour pointed out, a very Aiki principle adapted to a striking context. This is what really made WC "click" for me. It is a striking art but it is "soft".

Yeah, that whole point about them being weak during the step...great opportunity to destroy their structure to get to some aiki techniques.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is indeed If you can get past the vision of "stereotypical" Aikido with the uke (attacker) doing sloppy attacks and simply "flopping" regardless of the nage's (attacked) form. Some Aikidoka would deny it as well since the idea of going on offense is against their view. The Yoshinkan Aikido I studied however is not "above" offense however, hence why some in the larger community sometimes refer to that school, half jokingly, as being populated by "evil Aikidoka."

I think among the more modern aiki arts/styles, Yoshinkan and NGA are the most aggressive. If the ribs are there, we will beat them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I have always wondered about that. Given that when we do wing chun we take care not to give anyone force of our own to manipulate, and try to manipulate any force an opponent might give us I have always wondered how aikido might deal with you if you don’t present them force to take? (that is with my naïve assumption that the Aikido I have seen seems to require an opponent to give them some force to take)

That is the problem with what I call "pure aiki". It has to be a passive waiting game. NGA and Yoshinkan don't play that game - we'll hit (or use other methods) to create the energy we need.

 

[APL76]

You can replace "xyz" to any MA system, it will apply as well.

"if you encounter someone who really knows how to deploy "xyz" to its fullest extent ..."

of course it will, otherwise, as my Sifu always says, any martial art that doesn't do its job would have died out hundreds of years ago, it wouldn't have survived.

 

[Juany118]

I have always wondered about that. Given that when we do wing chun we take care not to give anyone force of our own to manipulate, and try to manipulate any force an opponent might give us I have always wondered how aikido might deal with you if you don’t present them force to take? (that is with my naïve assumption that the Aikido I have seen seems to require an opponent to give them some force to take)

That is where the form of the nage and whether they have trained against a uke who doesn't over commit. Think about it. To strike you still need to channel energy forward into the target. As we step in, even if on an angle, we still have forwarding energy. Most everything we do actually involves this forwarding energy and that can be turned around on us by an Aikidoka just as we train to use it in a WC vs WC encounter.

We are of course supposed to maintain our center, to not over commit but forwarding energy is still forwarding energy. You can't strike without it, that's just physics.

I may say, if I am in "aikido mode", "they are protecting their center very well so a breath throw is going to be problematic." (A breath throw is one of those classic circular Aikido throws) However if I properly set that person up with a counter strike or two I can still use their forwarding energy to take them down to the ground with a wrist lock or armbar. Once I control the limb I simply redirect their energy. The leverage I have and the energy they were using to attack, along with gravity, does the rest.

 

[Juany118]

That is the problem with what I call "pure aiki". It has to be a passive waiting game. NGA and Yoshinkan don't play that game - we'll hit (or use other methods) to create the energy we need.

Exactly. Move in "soften them up". If they retreat, use the energy to put them on their butt. If they counter attack, you are now "inside" and can use that new energy to put them on their face, or back. In either case because your strikes have disturbed their center and their reaction provides the energy.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

of course it will, otherwise, as my Sifu always says, any martial art that doesn't do its job would have died out hundreds of years ago, it wouldn't have survived.

This is a paradox. Assume:

- A really knows how to deploy A's MA style to it's fullest extend.
- B really knows how to deploy B's MA style to it's fullest extend.

What will happen when A fights B?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This is a paradox. Assume:

- A really knows how to deploy A's MA style to it's fullest extend.
- B really knows how to deploy B's MA style to it's fullest extend.

What will happen when A fights B?

Where's the paradox?

 

[Juany118]

Where's the paradox?

Where's the paradox?

I think he may be referring to the dynamic of a WC cat knows how to fight another WC cat very well BUT how well does the WC cat know how to fight an Aikido, or really any other breed of cat?