Is the wing chun punch real?

[moonhill99]

has this never been scientifically tested? i mean they have equipment to measure how much power a punch has.
has no wing chun guy ever tried measuring how hard his punch really is?! this would settle the debate once and for all.

if nobody ever dared to try this then this makes me suspicious.

It will not show a proper read out. Pushing a target that does not move is going to be really different than pshing a target that is always moving.

 

[moonhill99]

thanks for the explanations!

since i have already watched a few videos about the wc punch i already "know" how it's supposed to be done, like how to stand and how to move the arm and so on. this stuff sounds really difficult. i mean even when i watch videos and they show it and comment on it
then it's still really hard to grasp-

but my question isn't about technique and also not about chain punching.
is a single wing chun punch still more powerful than an ordinary punch? does it really feel different
inside of the body?
the stuff which they said in the videos about how it resonates reminded me a bit of the 5 finger death punch where
you cause internal damage without external injury.
i think i also heard this somewhere else that there are certain punches where you can damage
internal organs cause the power of the punch goes through the body!
i thought that this only exists in movies. but if the wing chun punch really feels different then this
would mean that this stuff is real.

what happens for example if you wing chun punch somebody in the chest where the heart is?
could this damage the heart or stop it? that would be really scary. on the other hand it would also
be pretty helpful when somebody attacks you and you can just stop his heart with a single punch.

and does muscle mass play NO role at all in the wing chun punch according to wing chun theory?
does this mean mike tyson couldn't do a harder wing chun punch than a 12 year old girl?! i cant really
imagine that.

is the wing chun punch similar to the 1 inch punch?

Why would wing chun punch not be real? Or why do you think a wing chun punch is not real?

You now karate and kung fu fighting is different than sport fighting that can put some one in hospital or really injure the person.

You know the MMA rules of want is allowed and not allowed.

 

[drop bear]

Why would wing chun punch not be real? Or why do you think a wing chun punch is not real?

You now karate and kung fu fighting is different than sport fighting that can put some one in hospital or really injure the person.

You know the MMA rules of want is allowed and not allowed.

No i think kung fu and karate could also put people in hospital.

 

[Juany118]

If you move in through your opponent's "right side door", your own center line is well protected too. You don't need to compromise your own center line.

The "side door" is the blind side. The hay-maker is part of the head lock (or choke).

The thing is it is about, in theory, your center line as well. The first video isn't to bad, I have done similar things at work BUT their my job is restrain/arrest. "Traditional" WC guys will say "our job is to punch not take down" and punches come from our center to the opponent's. The second not so much, you NEVER put your back to an opponent, period.

WC does use flanking, attacking from a blind side, but again its always to the center. The easiest way I can explain it as follows in terms if the basic (note I say basic) WC theory.
1. your center is defined by a line from your head straight down to the ground. You keep your arms in the space where you can attack and defend the same target or attack with both hands.
2. when you attack, with the above "arm space" in mind, it is targeted on the same line from the head of the opponent to the ground.

That is the simplest definition of the center line theory I can come up with and that is one of the defining principles of WC. Now you can still apply this standing to the left or right of the opponent, you need not be nose to nose, but the your center always connects to the opponent

 

[geezer]

...The first video isn't too bad...

John has posted these (and similar videos) numerous times here and on other forums. In offering critiques, everybody consistently misses the one really major problem.






........Never do a demo in hot-pink shorts!!!!

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

........Never do a demo in hot-pink shorts!!!!

It was red color and faded.

you NEVER put your back to an opponent, period. ... but the your center always connects to the opponent

This will put too much restriction on yourself.

I don't mind to

- date other girls, but I won't let the new girl to tell me what I should not do.
- cross training, but I won't let the new MA style to tell me what I should not do.

You

- date multiple girls not because you want them to all cook well. You want one girl to cook well, one girl to be pretty, one girl to be good on bed, and one girl ...
- cross train different MA styles not because they all follow the same principles but because they use different principles.

 

[geezer]

It was red color and faded.

It can happen the other way around too, like when my son dumped my white underwear in with a new red sweatshirt and washed them all together in hot water!


As far as turning your back to an opponent, that is something we always try to avoid in my lineage of WC. Of course we do have techniques to use when our opponent either surprises us from behind, or grapples and turns us around to get to our back.

Among those techniques are using our opponent's force to spin around and hit him with a spinning back elbow, a fist or a fak-sau (sideways chopping motion) ...not unlike the clip you posted, just that we try not to turn our back intentionally.

 

[elder999]

These threads are killing me.....

 

[Tez3]

- date other girls, but I won't let the new girl to tell me what I should not do.
- cross training, but I won't let the new MA style to tell me what I should not do.

SO..... when she says she doesn't want to make love you think you're not having her tell you what to do so have sex anyway......
and when a martial arts style says you shouldn't do a technique this way, you will do it that way and bust your arm/leg/whatever.
Can't see any problems there........................

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you train both MA style A and MA style B,

- MA style A tells you that you need to turn your back into your opponent in order to throw him over your head.
- MA style B tells you that you NEVER put your back to an opponent.

What will you do?

IMO, you will need to make that decision for yourself and not to let your MA style to make that decision for you. You are the master, your MA styles are your slaves. It should not be the other way around.

You may follow your

- WC principle when you train in your WC school.
- Judo principle when you train in your Judo school.
- own principle when you fight in the street.

 

[geezer]

IMO, you will need to make that decision for yourself and not to let your MA style to make that decision for you. You are the master, your MA styles are your slaves. It should not be the other way around.

You may follow your

- WC principle when you train in your WC school.
- Judo principle when you train in your Judo school.
- own principle when you fight in the street.

I agree. If I plan to move in close and attack somebody with punches, I'd follow the strategy and concepts of my wing chun. If I saw a great opportunity for a fight-ending throw and I knew judo or shuai chiao, I would apply the appropriate principles for that art.

You have to make the transition from one to the other. Mixing the two will just mess things up.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You have to make the transition from one to the other. Mixing the two will just mess things up.

In wrestling, you should only turn you back into your opponent when you can "control" his arms so it won't give you any trouble at that moment. This is the beauty of the under hook and over hook. When you under hook or over hook your opponent's arm and turn, since his arm is under your control, you are safe right at that moment. Of course you have to face your opponent to apply your over hook or under hook.

So in

- striking range, you follow your striking art principle.
- grappling range, you follow your grappling art principle.

But even in striking principles, you may turn your back at your opponent for your kick.

 

[Juany118]

I agree. If I plan to move in close and attack somebody with punches, I'd follow the strategy and concepts of my wing chun. If I saw a great opportunity for a fight-ending throw and I knew judo or shuai chiao, I would apply the appropriate principles for that art.

You have to make the transition from one to the other. Mixing the two will just mess things up.

I think this the thing, and maybe that is why some arts have grown more popular in the West. An "ex" of mine, and still best friend was born in Hong Kong. Her Grandfather studied Kung Fu, and was a contemporary of YM, in his case Hung Ga. However he also studied not only that but Chen Tai Chi Chuan. I never had the chance to speak with him about it but in speaking with her, he would "dance" from one to the other.

I think you have had been teaching, or are going to teach, a similar concept to what I do. If WC is appropriate I WC. If Kali is appropriate I Kali. Do I "think" about the transition as it occurs in real time? No, of course not, I simply act but afterwards if I ended up on the ground applying locks to a suspect I know that was Kali and not WC. If I am using the baton it is sure as heck Kali. Each art has it's own techniques and principles, that doesn't mean that in a fight in real life I need to choose one or the other, I can dance between them as needed even if each maintains their own unique identity.

 

[drop bear]

By the way. You can shoulder throw or seonagi and over rotate so you are not caught with your back exposed if you stuff it.

Should that happened you can then follow up with a single leg.