Long and short range Tan Sao

[guy b.]

you said "I don't see much in wing chun that is not about hitting. " - I was disagreeing and pointing out that there is a LOT more to WC then being being 'about hitting'! And, I was giving examples. Without WC bridging technology, how do you guarantee the 'hit' from a position of advantage? surely not just hoping you're faster/luckier than the next guy! But at least we agree now that it is surely about more than hitting if you agree with my reasoning

From what you wrote it is stll all about hitting. The end goal is hitting. Loi lau hoi sung: pressure centre, eat space, capitalise on errors. And the goal of loi lau hoi sung? Lat sau jik chung. This is why we loi lau hoi sung.

I left out a lot of things to keep the list short. no big deal.
But no, lat sau jik chun is not the most important part. It all goes hand-in-hand. You can't have yin without yang. And in this case, you can't focus on basting fwd and hitting without also knowing how to receive/escort incoming energies/obstacles. Without first being able to deal with our opponent's attack/bridge/energy, we can't reliably hit safely - all you have is cave man punching. This is simple wing chun fighting 101.

Loi lau hoi sung (pressure centre, capitalise on errors) so that you can lat sau jik chung (pull the trigger without hesitation when the situation arises due to pressure you are imposing). The first part is pointless without the second, while the second is much less likely to work without the first. They do work together but the end goal is to hit, not to impose pressure and control. You pressure and control in order to hit.

Like I already said some apply, some don't. You will surely pick 5 that don't, but I can also point to 5 that do. But it seems you are only interested in arguing the negative, so no point in going further.

The point I was trying to make is that wing chun doesn't traslate whole (principle wise) to the ground (never mind the lack of usable techniques there, and the non applicability of wing chun biomechanics in many positions). You need to alter wing chun principles to be groundfighting effectively, maybe allowing some while ruling others out. This is because it isn't a ground fighting art! If you end up there, and especially if you are on top, then sure you may be able to use some of what you know from wing chun to pressure and hurt your opponent. But you aren't going to win any grappling competitions with it, and frankly, in any but the most biased view, there are better options.

 

[JPinAZ]

From what you wrote it is stll all about hitting. The end goal is hitting. Loi lau hoi sung: pressure centre, eat space, capitalise on errors. And the goal of loi lau hoi sung? Lat sau jik chung. This is why we loi lau hoi sung.

No, that's what you are choosing to hear. WC is not 'all about hitting'. WC is about ending the fight as efficiently and effectively as possibly. You can accomplish that wihtout hitting and KO'g someone. While I agree it is a primary focus in most cases, it's not what WC is 'all about'. IMO, that's a very limited and/or beginner POV. I see a lot of beginners that focus mostly on the hitting and quickly ignore all the steps it takes to get there safely and set yourself up to be able to do it from a position of advantage. And then wonder why stuff isn't working and they keep getting hit lol

Loi lau hoi sung (pressure centre, capitalise on errors) so that you can lat sau jik chung (pull the trigger without hesitation when the situation arises due to pressure you are imposing). The first part is pointless without the second, while the second is much less likely to work without the first. They do work together but the end goal is to hit, not to impose pressure and control. You pressure and control in order to hit.

I think we're saying the same thing for the most part. It's seems you may be getting hung up on a chicken/egg issue. In a fight, if you aren't able to end it quickly, you will find yourself going back and forth between LLHS & LSJC a lot - and fast.
Really, I you can't separate the two, or place value on one over the other or you're going to cause more issues in the long run. I prefer to look at LLHS/LSJC as a whole, not 2 separate halves (but for discussion purposes you can split them for to make things more simple went focusing one part or the other).

The point I was trying to make is that wing chun doesn't traslate whole (principle wise) to the ground (never mind the lack of usable techniques there, and the non applicability of wing chun biomechanics in many positions). You need to alter wing chun principles to be groundfighting effectively, maybe allowing some while ruling others out. This is because it isn't a ground fighting art! If you end up there, and especially if you are on top, then sure you may be able to use some of what you know from wing chun to pressure and hurt your opponent. But you aren't going to win any grappling competitions with it, and frankly, in any but the most biased view, there are better options.

I never said it did translate whole to the ground and agree with you for the most part so not sure your point. Arguing with yourself here?
And I hope you aren't putting words into my mouth and think I'm advocating WC was designed to win grappling competitions against ground fighting arts - that's just stupid. More arguing with yourself?