How to Box with Wing Chun

[geezer]

I don't think that's the point John's trying to make.

No, you're probably right. He's talking about what makes an appealing demo. Still, comments like that can be misconstrued. All that aside, I prefer sticking to WC (as I understand it) whether it looks cool or not. But then I've been getting more and more turned off by theatrics as I get older. It's gotten to the point where I won't even wear my pretty WC pajama pants to class any more. An old pair of gym shorts just seems so much more honest. Next thing I'll be wanting to drop the whole "sifu" title and wanting to be called "coach". ...Or then again, maybe not, at least not yet.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Such a 100% committed finish seems more characteristic of a very external system like Hung ga or Shotokan Karate, and honestly isn't very representative of WC. One of the WC principles (at least of my lineage) is Mo kuen yat fat or no one-punch technique. We refrain from over committing, even as a "finish". It does make for a nice demo though.

Also, do you really think that TCMA, as a rule, hit's harder than a western boxer? I mean, while I am committed to WC and respect the surprising short power it can help us develop, I really don't think you should undervalue the punching power of a good boxer!

I see no reason that TCMA guys cannot hit as hard as boxers. All the power generation method are clearly defined in the TCMA system. IMO, if you (general YOU) can't knock your opponent down by one punch, your striking power may have some issue. If you have to deal with multiple opponents on this street, that one punch knock out is very important. The faster that you can knock your opponent down, the safer that you will be in that multiple opponents environment. All MA guys want to develop that fast knock/take down skill.

When you deal with a grappler, if you can knock him down in one punch, none of his grappling skill can apply on you. If you need to throw many punches to knock him down, you will give him opportunity to obtain the clinch that he is looking for.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

He's talking about what makes an appealing demo.

As an outsider the problem I see with wc is that there seems to be a lot of guys talking and theorizing about "concepts" and "scientific" approach but we see very little demonstration of technique against a resisting partner of comparable skill. You see wc guys making videos about how to beat style x,y,z but you don't see the other styles making videos about how to beat wc. We may be seeing a slow change in the wc community but wc guys will have to prove that all their theory and concepts work. Of course you have the standard, "wc is not a sport" tired argument and it will never change anyone's opinion.

IMO, the only way to remove Mephisto's doubt is to put up a clip and demonstrate "WC knock down power". The centerline theory is like the rocket. The knock down power is like the nuclear head. Both are equally important.

 

[KPM]

I did watch every single second of your 1st clip and I agree with what you have said there. I think it will be nice to add a "100% final committed punch" to demonstrate your "knock down power". That extra 1 second addition will make your clip "perfect" with a nice ending.

I always like to see clips that TCMA guys can punch harder than boxer does. To apply WC principles is important. To apply WC "finish power" is also important.

John, I showed a lead hand punch from an outside range with a "drop step" or "falling step". That is as "committed" as I am willing to get, and it has "knock down power." I don't know what you else you might want, other than a big lunging Hung Ga type punch. But that's not Wing Chun.

 

[Argus]

I'm not staunch WC hater, i'm always open to evidence that will change my opinion. I will seriously consider anything you bring to light. At this point though I think what i'd find most convincing is video of a WC guy applying his technique against a resisting opponent of comparable size and skill. There are big athletic guys that do WC that could hand me my lunch but i'm not convinced that an equally sized opponent would have such success. There are a lot of videos of guys explaining and demonstrating on bags and compliant partners. Some videos even have the guys put on gear and an attacker will lunge in with one punch only to become docile and compliant for the defender to unleash a flurry of strikes. Here's one of the better videos i've run across, there's a lot of dancing but the WC guy seems to use his technique effectively of the other guy.

Hey, sorry I took it as such!

I sent you a PM so as not to take the thread too off topic. I did fail to mention that you should look at fencing theory, though - despite being unrelated in time and culture, the principles behind Historic European Rapier and German Longsword (Lichtenauer Tradition) are identical to Wing Chun, and provide good proof of concept as well.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

John, I showed a lead hand punch from an outside range with a "drop step" or "falling step". That is as "committed" as I am willing to get, and it has "knock down power." I don't know what you else you might want, other than a big lunging Hung Ga type punch. But that's not Wing Chun.

If your "1st leading hand committed punch" is WC, why is your "2nd back hand committed punch" not WC?

This thread is talking about "how to box with WC". If the "boxing leading arm jab" fits into the WC principle, why should the "boxing back arm cross" not fit into the WC principle?

 

[KPM]

If your "1st leading hand committed punch" is WC, why is your "2nd back hand committed punch" not WC?

This thread is talking about "how to box with WC". If the "boxing leading arm jab" fits into the WC principle, why should the "boxing back arm cross" not fit into the WC principle?

I don't understand what you are asking John. I can do a "falling step" with the rear foot and punch as well, I just didn't show it on the video. I can also step through so that my rear hand becomes the lead hand with a falling step that has lots of penetration and knock down power. And if I throw a 1, 2 combination with my lead and rear hand using a good power-line while using the hips and keeping the elbows down in good Wing Chun fashion as I show in the video, how is my "cross" not fitting into the WC principle? How is my second punch "not WC"?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

how is my "cross" not fitting into the WC principle? How is my second punch "not WC"?

The above was my question. I asked whether boxing "cross" fit into WC or not.

The following is your answer. I didn't ask for "a big lunging Hung Ga type punch".

I don't know what you else you might want, other than a big lunging Hung Ga type punch. But that's not Wing Chun.

If we also add the following post, it will get even more confused about what WC is, and what WC is not.

Such a 100% committed finish seems more characteristic of a very external system like Hung ga or Shotokan Karate, and honestly isn't very representative of WC. One of the WC principles (at least of my lineage) is Mo kuen yat fat or no one-punch technique. We refrain from over committing, even as a "finish".

 

[Marnetmar]

In certain instances you can use a type of hook in W.C as well (see Biu Jee)

 

[KPM]

The above was my question. I asked whether boxing "cross" fit into WC or not.

.

I'm sorry John, if that was what you were asking, I completely missed it. I thought you were asking about "knock down power" or "100% committed punch." So in answer to your question "does a boxing "cross" fit into WC or not?"......from my perspective....No, it doesn't. At least not the modern boxing cross with the elbow turned outward and the fist horizontal. Like I explained in the video, the elbow and the shoulder has to stay down so that the punch stays coupled to the hip movement and the power-line can go from the ground straight out the fist. But a WC punch with the rear hand is just as powerful if not more powerful than a boxer's cross.

 

[Thunder Foot]

I sent you a PM so as not to take the thread too off topic. I did fail to mention that you should look at fencing theory, though - despite being unrelated in time and culture, the principles behind Historic European Rapier and German Longsword (Lichtenauer Tradition) are identical to Wing Chun, and provide good proof of concept as well.

According to Jesse Glover and Ted Wong, that's precisely what Bruce discovered. His brother was a competition fencer.

 

[Thunder Foot]

I'm sorry John, if that was what you were asking, I completely missed it. I thought you were asking about "knock down power" or "100% committed punch." So in answer to your question "does a boxing "cross" fit into WC or not?"......from my perspective....No, it doesn't. At least not the modern boxing cross with the elbow turned outward and the fist horizontal. Like I explained in the video, the elbow and the shoulder has to stay down so that the punch stays coupled to the hip movement and the power-line can go from the ground straight out the fist. But a WC punch with the rear hand is just as powerful if not more powerful than a boxer's cross.

KPM, cool videos. I happen to do both as well. One thing I wanted to ask, and maybe I missed it... but I didn't see the shifting footwork of the chum kiu ma and the darting footwork found in the 2nd and 3rd form? I agree with the relation of the elbow to the hip, and to me the shifting is what allows the power generation in WC without being overcommitted and losing structure. Sorry if I may have missed it.

 

[KPM]

KPM, cool videos. I happen to do both as well. One thing I wanted to ask, and maybe I missed it... but I didn't see the shifting footwork of the chum kiu ma and the darting footwork found in the 2nd and 3rd form? I agree with the relation of the elbow to the hip, and to me the shifting is what allows the power generation in WC without being overcommitted and losing structure. Sorry if I may have missed it.

My videos were focusing on the "boxing" or "punching" range. I made a comment that once we close to what is essentially the "Wing Chun" range, then all the typical training should kick in, including shifting footwork. Glad you liked the videos. I have a couple more coming. ;-)

 

[KPM]

Hi Guys!

Since I got a good response to my first 2 videos, I decided to do a few more! Rather than post them individually I'll make it easier and just post the link to my youtube channel. Check them out in sequence and let me know what you think.

Keith Myers - YouTube

Part 3: Clarifies some points from the prior videos and talks about evasiveness
Part 4: The longest clip yet, covers basic defenses using Wing Chun
Part 5: Talks about how to practice all of this on the Wing Chun Dummy!

 

[KPM]

Any feedback guys? Come on, I want hear what you think! I thought at least my comment about YGKYM actually being more than just a training stance would get some kind of response. :boing2:

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Cute doggie!

Seriously, I'm not a Wing Chun guy, but I thought the videos were well done and more focused on effective application than many WC videos I've seen. I was doing some old school bare-knuckle boxing technique in a seminar last weekend and it was interesting to see the parallels.

 

[kung fu fighter]

Keith, Thanks and appreciate the time you took to make the videos. Even though our interpretation differ. I found your perspective refreshing and insightful. I was impressed by your knowledge of old school boxing and nice boxing power generation.I would have liked to see a little more how you work on the inside at close range with pin sun wck after you close the gap with old school boxing tactics.

When in close range do you still raise your rear heel when torquing to engage your rear hand like a boxing cross? or does your heels maintain contact with the ground like traditional PSWC as you torque?

Perhaps in the future you can do a video on how pure wing chun is applied in a non sparring situation such as on the battle field (life and death scenerio or street fight).

 

[Argus]

KPM, you call your stuff "boxing with Wing Chun," but all I see is good Wing Chun

Really, I believe how you're applying WC is largely how it's meant to be applied. The only element you haven't covered (except with the pak-and-hit, which was a good example) is how to apply lat-sau-jik-chung, and follow the opponent in when he removes a hand. I've always felt this would be a very useful principle against boxers, given how they retract their punches - but would take some practice.

All in all, really good stuff. I think most WC practitioners lose sight of the real goal: we're trying to hit the guy, first and foremost. Chisau is important, but we're trying to hit our opponent, not chisau with him -- only when he puts something in the way and we fail to actually hit him, does chisau come into play, and help us to flow and continue our own attack with the end goal being, once again, to hit.

 

[KPM]

Hi Navin!

When in close range do you still raise your rear heel when torquing to engage your rear hand like a boxing cross? or does your heels maintain contact with the ground like traditional PSWC as you torque?

---No. When in "Wing Chun range", ie close range things "square up" more and no need to raise the rear heel at all. "Typical" Wing Chun kicks in. Its here that the YGKYM comes into play for all those that think it is a "training stance only." ;-) But I'll point out as well that some people see a pivoted stance as different from the YGKYM, and they pivot to produce power in the punch when in close. In Pin Sun we use the waist/Kua much more and can essentially "pivot" without moving the feet at all. So we are using the YGKYM when in close and only really pivoting when we need to take an angle.

Perhaps in the future you can do a video on how pure wing chun is applied in a non sparring situation such as on the battle field (life and death scenerio or street fight).

---Sounds like a good suggestion! Esssentially my goal wasn't to make videos about Pin Sun. My goal was to make videos about how to use Wing Chun in a "boxing" scenario. I just happen to do Pin Sun. ;-)

 

[KPM]

KPM, you call your stuff "boxing with Wing Chun," but all I see is good Wing Chun

---Well, I'm glad to hear you say that! My decision to make this video series was a reaction to what seemed to be a recurrent theme on the facebook Wing Chun forum. People would post videos of sparring with Wing Chun and more often than not it would look like some poor form of "pseudo-boxing." I'd ask "why aren't you using your Wing Chun?" and the reply would be something like "Wing Chun isn't easily defined...you are being too close-minded in what you consider to be Wing Chun" or "anything that comes from my hands is Wing Chun" or "Wing Chun is anything that works" or some other BS like that. I made these videos to show that you can do Wing Chun in a "boxing format" without resorting to some form of modern boxing spin-off that is neither good boxing nor good Wing Chun.

The only element you haven't covered (except with the pak-and-hit, which was a good example) is how to apply lat-sau-jik-chung, and follow the opponent in when he removes a hand. I've always felt this would be a very useful principle against boxers, given how they retract their punches - but would take some practice.

---Good point! I'll keep that in mind for a future installment. ;-)

All in all, really good stuff. I think most WC practitioners lose sight of the real goal: we're trying to hit the guy, first and foremost. Chisau is important, but we're trying to hit our opponent, not chisau with him -- only when he puts something in the way and we fail to actually hit him, does chisau come into play, and help us to flow and continue our own attack with the end goal being, once again, to hit.

---I agree completely! Too often Wing Chun people think they should be doing some kind of Chi Sau-y thing when all the have to do is put together a good combination of strong punches! And when they do put together punches, too often its just a rushing in with chain punching!