How to flow out of a pinned hand.

[futsaowingchun]

You can "redefine" things to make it fit your narrative...but it doesn't change the fact that you chased hands first in order to effect is center.

why are you so obsessed with this chasing hands stuff.. First am not from the WSL school so i really dont care about his made up chasing hands stuff..

 

[APL76]

why are you so obsessed with this chasing hands stuff.. First am not from the WSL school so i really dont care about his made up chasing hands stuff..

In wckf92's defense chasing hands is definitely a thing, and usually a bad thing to do, but how one defines it might differ from one group the the next.

I've seen some people argue that if you do anything other than attempt to hit a person (often you will hear "attack the centre") even if that anything includes dealing with an oncoming attack, a punch to the head perhaps, then you are chasing hands. I can see the rationale behind such an argument but I wouldn't agree with it. For a start, in both styles of wing chun I learned attacking the wrist of an incoming attacking arm is an entirely legitimate target and more often than not done in conjunction with an attack to elsewhere on the body. Moreover, you don't need to chase anything if some guy's fist is chasing your face.

What I would characterise as chasing hands would be, lets say someone has thrown a punch, you have caught the punch with, maybe, tan sao. The guy punching is extended and so to redeploy that punch (lets assume he is one armed for the sake of the illustration) he needs to retrieve it and relaunch a new punch.
Now, were I to follow that punch back and take the first opportunity to hit the guy when I had the line, I am following "force comes deflect, force retreats follow, if there's no force rush in and attack". If, however, I forgo hitting the guy once a clear line presented itself in order to stick to the guy's arm then I'm chasing hands. There may be reasons why one might want to do that, but in general its something to avoid from my point of view.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"force retreats follow". ...stick to the guy's arm ...

Many years ago, someone said, "If I can move back faster than your forward footwork, none of your technique will work on me." His comment had bothered me for a long time. One day I suddenly realized that "follow/stick" is just not good enough. I need "connect" instead. If my body can connect with my opponent's body, when he moves back, his body will pull my body with him.

Which one is better,

1. A punches B, B blocks. B then punches back at A.
2. A punches B, B blocks. B grabs, pulls A's punching arm, and then punches back at A.

IMO, 1 (block) < 2 (block, grab, pull) for the following reasons:

- B's arm wrapping can prevent A from moving back too fast and avoid B's next punch.
- B's arm wrapping can help B to move into A faster by counter force.
- A won't have chance to pull back his punching arm and uses it for defense.
- B can create a head on collision that A + B > A.
- B can change a punching game into a grappling game right at that moment if he wants to.

 

[wckf92]

why are you so obsessed with this chasing hands stuff.. First am not from the WSL school so i really dont care about his made up chasing hands stuff..

First of all...you already replied to this in post 25 so not sure what you are on about.
Second, not obsessed with chasing hands.
Third, I never said you were from the WSL school so...again, not sure what you are getting at.
And finally, I've never heard that WSL "made up" chasing hands "stuff".? Do you know this for a fact?

 

[APL76]

Many years ago, someone said, "If I can move back faster than your forward footwork, none of your technique will work on me." His comment had bothered me for a long time. One day I suddenly realized that "follow/stick" is just not good enough. I need "connect" instead. If my body can connect with my opponent's body, when he moves back, his body will pull my body with him.

Which one is better,

1. A punches B, B blocks. B then punches back at A.
2. A punches B, B blocks. B grabs, pulls A's punching arm, and then punches back at A.

IMO, 1 (block) < 2 (block, grab, pull) for the following reasons:

- B's arm wrapping can prevent A from moving back too fast and avoid B's next punch.
- B's arm wrapping can help B to move into A faster by counter force.
- A won't have chance to pull back his punching arm and uses it for defense.
- B can create a head on collision that A + B > A.
- B can change a punching game into a grappling game right at that moment if he wants to.

Well you are throwing out quite a few possibilities, and I'm not really following what you point is, but I'm guessing that its to do with footwork. I guess, yeah, you move in and stick where it is appropriate, if that means you advance with footwork then so be it.

 

[futsaowingchun]

First of all...you already replied to this in post 25 so not sure what you are on about.
Second, not obsessed with chasing hands.
Third, I never said you were from the WSL school so...again, not sure what you are getting at.
And finally, I've never heard that WSL "made up" chasing hands "stuff".? Do you know this for a fact?

Wsl people are the first to coin the term chasing hands it's his philosophy which is fine but don't expect everyone to jump on board with his this.. If you believe am chasing hands that's fine but to me it's not important am not from that school of though and have my own way of doing things and wsl and his followers have theirs.

 

[futsaowingchun]

In wckf92's defense chasing hands is definitely a thing, and usually a bad thing to do, but how one defines it might differ from one group the the next.

I've seen some people argue that if you do anything other than attempt to hit a person (often you will hear "attack the centre") even if that anything includes dealing with an oncoming attack, a punch to the head perhaps, then you are chasing hands. I can see the rationale behind such an argument but I wouldn't agree with it. For a start, in both styles of wing chun I learned attacking the wrist of an incoming attacking arm is an entirely legitimate target and more often than not done in conjunction with an attack to elsewhere on the body. Moreover, you don't need to chase anything if some guy's fist is chasing your face.

What I would characterise as chasing hands would be, lets say someone has thrown a punch, you have caught the punch with, maybe, tan sao. The guy punching is extended and so to redeploy that punch (lets assume he is one armed for the sake of the illustration) he needs to retrieve it and relaunch a new punch.
Now, were I to follow that punch back and take the first opportunity to hit the guy when I had the line, I am following "force comes deflect, force retreats follow, if there's no force rush in and attack". If, however, I forgo hitting the guy once a clear line presented itself in order to stick to the guy's arm then I'm chasing hands. There may be reasons why one might want to do that, but in general its something to avoid from my point of view.

Chasing hands is a thing for some but for me I don't follow the crowd and it's not an issue for me..

 

[Holmejr]

How to escape a pinned hand. Using a relaxed body to flow out of the pinned arm position.

Late for the show here, but I think the video is very good. I’m not super familiar with WC, but the vid shows a pretty linear approach to the movement. In our art, that would also be a valid movement, accept we would attempt to angle off and end up on the opponents back. During tapi tapi we end up like that often with the opponent pushing our arm up into our center line or in front of our face. Also, this is simply a movement in a chain of movements, flowing as the situation requires. This is also shown in slow motion, where in combat it is violent and immediate. We’ll practice it in class this weekend! Fun stuff!

 

[drop bear]

Personally, I’m starting to get the impression that the OP’s "Center Point" theory might really just be his way of coming to the realization that the chasing center concept 追形 in Wing Chun is about the opponent’s centerline, not our own centerline. I fear that in an attempt to think outside the box, he is also in danger of mistakenly reinventing the wheel.

While the OP’s breakthrough may not necessarily be new or unique, the take-away I get is that it’s a new discovery for him… and ultimately in my opinion that can be a good thing. However, it is never a good idea to sacrifice core concepts in the process of personal discovery because it can put the functionality of the system at a risk.

This is a solid reminder to all of us. We need to be cautious not to place so much value on our own ideas that they become a justification for destroying the foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching us.

Not really. The whole point of coming up with new concepts is that they are not the old concepts.

You test the idea and it works or it doesn't.

If it works the core concepts are sound. And you have to figure out what those concepts are.

 

[Callen]

Not really. The whole point of coming up with new concepts is that they are not the old concepts.

You test the idea and it works or it doesn't.

If it works the core concepts are sound. And you have to figure out what those concepts are.

I'll stand behind my point.

If new ideas destroy the core foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching, then those ideas are not beneficial to the system.

 

[wckf92]

Wsl people are the first to coin the term chasing hands it's his philosophy which is fine but don't expect everyone to jump on board with his this.. If you believe am chasing hands that's fine but to me it's not important am not from that school of though and have my own way of doing things and wsl and his followers have theirs.

Well...you seem quite obsessed with WSL. Good luck on your journey.

 

[drop bear]

I'll stand behind my point.

If new ideas destroy the core foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching, then those ideas are not beneficial to the system.

Which is completely limiting to understanding your martial art.

If the core principles can be destroyed. Then they should be.

What exactly is the benefit of preserving a principle that is broken?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I'm not really following what you point is,

My point is stick/follow is not good enough. Connection is better. If my hand can hold on your arm (chasing arm?), when you move back, your body will pull my body with you.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If the core principles can be destroyed. Then they should be.

What exactly is the benefit of preserving a principle that is broken?

Agree that one should be honest to his testing.

Does "body slam" destroy the "jump guard" core principle?

https://i.postimg.cc/SRgHm34B/body-slam.gif

 

[Dirty Dog]

If new ideas destroy the core foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching, then those ideas are not beneficial to the system.

So the system is incapable of evolving or growing?

 

[geezer]

I'll stand behind my point.

If new ideas destroy the core foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching, then those ideas are not beneficial to the system.

This is an important point. I agree with Drop Bear's idea of testing what works and what doesn't. At the same time, not everything that works belongs in WC.

If you create a martial art out of everything that works in every situation, you'd end up with an overcomplicated mess.

Wing Chun is defined as much by what we don't do as by what we do. By simplifying and limiting our scope and trying to get more from less, we seek greater efficiency and spontaneity. Sometimes less is more.

 

[geezer]

So the system is incapable of evolving or growing?

No. In fact I call what I do "Adaptive Wing Chun". We are very open to new approaches, provided:

1. They work ...i.e. solve a problem.
2. They fit within the scope of what our WC is about.

If a technique or "move" meets the simple criteria above, I'm betting that they do express our theoretical foundation!

 

[drop bear]

This is an important point. I agree with Drop Bear's idea of testing what works and what doesn't. At the same time, everything that works doesn't belong in WC.

If you create a martial art out of everything that works in every situation, you'd end up with an overcomplicated mess.

Wing Chun is defined as much by what we don't do as by what we do. By simplifying and limiting our scope and trying to get more from less, we seek greater efficiency and spontaneity. Sometimes less is more.

Say old mate was doing chi sau. (Which I assume is the context) and is pulling off that move, regardless if it is core principles or not. Then you just have to deal with that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Say old mate was doing chi sau. (Which I assume is the context) and is pulling off that move, regardless if it is core principles or not. Then you just have to deal with that.

But in the WC sticky hand, you suppose to be able to control both of your opponent's arms. In the OP's clip, both his left arm and his opponent's left arm are free.

 

[drop bear]

But in the WC sticky hand, you suppose to be able to control both of your opponent's arms. In the OP's clip, both his left arm and his opponent's left arm are free.

I am not necessarily saying that move would would work. I wouldn't know.