WC Punch

[LFJ]

So yes, it is an appeal to majority, and it is perfectly valid!

lol

The majority of YM students didn't learn the free fighting aspect of VT.

---Again, were you there?

Don't need to have been. Just look at what they teach.

And a Tan Da does not use two arms against one. It uses one arm against one while the other arm is striking through the opening created.

That's two arms to deal the opponent's one punch when one arm could do the same.

But I've got news for you.....more appeal to majority here.....both Pin Sun Wing Chun and Tang Yik Weng Chun have a Tan Da and consider it simultaneous attack and defense! So just maybe the complete understanding of the concept is actually lost on you!

That is simultaneous, but it's not a particularly special skill to develop. LSDD is referring to something more developed and unique to VT fighting tactics.

---John never said he didn't learn to do that. He only said he has a wider understanding of how the concept can be applied than you do!

No. It's very clear he has never heard of it and has no idea how it might work.

 

[KPM]

That's two arms to deal the opponent's one punch when one arm could do the same.

----Show me how you are going to defend and land a punch at the same time with the same arm against an opponent throwing a wide punch from the outside.



That is simultaneous, but it's not a particularly special skill to develop. LSDD is referring to something more developed and unique to VT fighting tactics.

----So let me get this right, because I can never tell with you guys. Are you saying that in your WSLVT, defending with one arm while striking into the opening created at the same time with the other arm is something you don't do and don't consider LSDD?



No. It's very clear he has never heard of it and has no idea how it might work.

---No. The only thing becoming clear is that you have a very narrow view of what Wing Chun is.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

That's two arms to deal the opponent's one punch when one arm could do the same.

When you use left Tang Shou to push your opponent's left arm to his right, his own leading left arm will also jam his own back right arm. So, you are using 1 arm to control your opponent's 2 arms (use his leading arm to jam his back arm). This give you a free right arm to strike through your opponent's "left side door" that he has no arm to deal with your strike.

Of course, since you are already on your opponent's "left side door", you can use your left hand to strike on his face. The problem is if your opponent change his left arm to Bong Shou, he can stop your left arm face punch. But if you use your right hand to push on his left elbow joint toward his right, it can free your left arm to strike on his face.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

No. It's very clear he has never heard of it and has no idea how it might work.

Through the online discussion, I try not to use words such as, "You don't know ...". I will never do this to others. I don't appreciate others do it to me. I don't know you and you don't know me. I don't know what you know and you don't know what I know.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The only thing becoming clear is that you have a very narrow view of what Wing Chun is.

I'm not sure who this is referring to, but this is what I see when speaking to some people who do Wing Chun. I've had discussions with people from other martial art systems and they are more willing to accept that there are variations in the applications of techniques. By this I mean that one Wing Chun lineage may have a very squared off stance while another lineage may use the side stance more. Instead of accepting that both are Wing Chun and that one lineage just uses a different stance to apply Wing Chun, the Wing Chun practitioners will get into a heated debate about what is "Real Wing Chun"

One technique, One stance, One tactic, does not make or break a system, nor does it define one.

 

[JowGaWolf]

When you use left Tang Shou to push your opponent's left arm to his right, his own leading left arm will also jam his own back right arm. So, you are using 1 arm to control your opponent's 2 arms (use his leading arm to jam his back arm). This give you a free right arm to strike through your opponent's "left side door" that he has no arm to deal with your strike.

Of course, since you are already on your opponent's "left side door", you can use your left hand to strike on his face. The problem is if your opponent change his left arm to Bong Shou, he can stop your face punch. But if you use your right hand to push on his left elbow joint toward his right, it can free your left arm to strike on his face.

I give up. People only see what they want them to see. If LFJ's analysis of the illustration that you posted is limited then so will LFJ's martial art skill. In honesty everyone should be seeing more than a simultaneous block and punch as the only available strike. If a person is caught in that position, then it won't matter if that blocking hand strikes or not because there are so many other better options that can be done after those ribs are broken.lol.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One technique, One stance, One tactic, does not make or break a system, nor does it define one.

As I have said, there are only 4 types of hand skills that exist on this planet among all MA systems. Those are:

1. Block with one arm and strike with another arm (either at the same time or one after another).
2. Strike with one arm, when your opponent block it, you use the other arm to re-block his blocking arm, free your striking arm, you then strike with the same arm (this is called "single switching hands" in general).
3. Use the same arm to block/deflect and strike.
4. Dodge and strike back without blocking.

All 4 methods have it's value.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If a person is caught in that position, then it won't matter if that blocking hand strikes or not because there are so many other better options that can be done after those ribs are broken.lol.

It's always better to use 1 offense hand and 1 defense hand. For example, when you opponent throws a hook punch at your head. You dodge under it and then uppercut him. You are using 1 arm to deal with his 1 arm. The issue is, when you dodge his hook, since his elbow joint is free, he can elbow strike on the side of your head. In order to prevent this from happening, you can use your other hand to push on his elbow joint (now you are using 2 hands). If your opponent also use his other hand to push away your elbow pushing hand (now he also uses 2 hands), he can still elbow strikes at your head.

 

[Eric_H]

Very late to this party, but I wouldn't call what is demonstrated in the original video as a characteristic WC punch. I also don't believe teaching it that way in forms is helpful.

Simultaneous offense and defense must be a possibility in both one hand and two hand engagements. Being able to play both roles on one bridge is a far more desirable, and harder to achieve skill wise IMO.

 

[LFJ]

That's two arms to deal the opponent's one punch when one arm could do the same.

----Show me how you are going to defend and land a punch at the same time with the same arm against an opponent throwing a wide punch from the outside.

I said "when one arm could do the same". There is a right and wrong time for everything in VT. What I will never do, though, is let a taan-sau run out to meet a punch, unless I want to get knocked out.

----So let me get this right, because I can never tell with you guys. Are you saying that in your WSLVT, defending with one arm while striking into the opening created at the same time with the other arm is something you don't do and don't consider LSDD?

No. As I said, there is a right and wrong time for everything. We can use helping actions like paak-da or jat-da, but these are generally secondary actions. And again, that's not a particularly special skill to develop. And so LSDD is not referring to such a common idea that doesn't need a maxim.

LSDD is the idea of da sau jik si siu sau, "the striking arm is also the neutralizing arm". This is a unique skill that takes a lot of work to develop and is what much of the VT system is focused on as central to the fighting strategy and tactics, hence the maxim.

---No. The only thing becoming clear is that you have a very narrow view of what Wing Chun is.

I'm not the one that has a limited view of simultaneous attack and defense requiring two arms. I just don't do superfluous actions.

 

[LFJ]

Through the online discussion, I try not to use words such as, "You don't know ...". I will never do this to others. I don't appreciate others do it to me. I don't know you and you don't know me. I don't know what you know and you don't know what I know.

I wouldn't presume to know what you know, but based on what you've presented in this thread I can see one thing you don't know. This is not a personal attack, and it's not your fault if you've never encountered the idea.

But you make the bold assertion below that only 4 types of hand skills exist on this planet among all MA systems, as if you've studied every style in existence.

But you have described #3 as non-simultaneous block then strike. You are still missing simultaneous deflection and striking with a single arm in a single beat, and seem totally confused as to how that might be done.

Again, not a personal attack. You just demonstrate that you are unaware of this skill, but it exists.

As I have said, there are only 4 types of hand skills that exist on this planet among all MA systems. Those are:

1. Block with one arm and strike with another arm (either at the same time or one after another).
2. Strike with one arm, when your opponent block it, you use the other arm to re-block his blocking arm, free your striking arm, you then strike with the same arm (this is called "single switching hands" in general).
3. Use the same arm to block/deflect and strike.
4. Dodge and strike back without blocking.

 

[Phobius]

Be all of this as it may, the simultaneous attack and defend using a single arm. It is not rocket science but to be honest I do not give it my entire life to study it either in all the finest details like LFJ seems to do in his lineage.

Problem is that it sounds to me as if LFJ is only focusing on this one type of attack. It is this one sided devotion to a single aspect that should bother everyone. We can not learn just one thing in order to be good at what we do. We always need to switch up our game.

Of course for self defense it is correct I believe to focus on a single type of punch and just do it over and over again til you can name yourself master of it. Most often that will win you the fight, but if all we wanted was self defense we would not be on this forum calling ourselves martial artists.

So LFJ, how much focus do you put on other types of punches?

 

[LFJ]

It is not rocket science but to be honest I do not give it my entire life to study it either in all the finest details like LFJ seems to do in his lineage.

Problem is that it sounds to me as if LFJ is only focusing on this one type of attack. It is this one sided devotion to a single aspect that should bother everyone.

It is given priority because it is the most simple, direct, and efficient method. These are principles VT fighting strategy is based on.

But there is no one-sided devotion when facing reality. Everything else in the system is about when the core idea is interrupted.

Other lineages, from my point of view, put the cart before the horse by using secondary actions as primary actions. Doing this when the primary action is available is superfluous and violates all three of the core VT principles.

But in many cases, they lack the primary idea altogether. Secondary ideas are all they have. Yet... I have the "narrow view" of VT.

 

[JowGaWolf]

It is given priority because it is the most simple, direct, and efficient method. These are principles VT fighting strategy is based on.

But there is no one-sided devotion when facing reality. Everything else in the system is about when the core idea is interrupted.

Other lineages, from my point of view, put the cart before the horse by using secondary actions as primary actions. Doing this when the primary action is available is superfluous and violates all three of the core VT principles.

But in many cases, they lack the primary idea altogether. Secondary ideas are all they have. Yet... I have the "narrow view" of VT.

Ok, then what is your secondary idea?

 

[LFJ]

Ok, then what is your secondary idea?

Helping actions to open the way for continued striking.

This is where two arms may become necessary, rather than superfluous.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I don't know what you mean by helping actions. punches, kicks, sweeps, grabs? none of the above?

 

[LFJ]

I don't know what you mean by helping actions. punches, kicks, sweeps, grabs? none of the above?

E.g. paak-da or jat-da.

VT fighting is very simple by design. In the majority of cases only three actions will be necessary; the dual-functioning punch, paak, and jat. The latter two open the way when the punch has been interrupted, and they are always accompanied with another punch. Most everything else is there if we've lost position and need to get back to the primary idea of... punching.

 

[JowGaWolf]

E.g. paak-da or jat-da.

VT fighting is very simple by design. In the majority of cases only three actions will be necessary; the dual-functioning punch, paak, and jat. The latter two open the way when the punch has been interrupted, and they are always accompanied with another punch. Most everything else is there if we've lost position and need to get back to the primary idea of... punching.

So what would be the response if I sweep you?

 

[LFJ]

So what would be the response if I sweep you?

Who knows? It would depend entirely on the circumstance. Sweep is a pretty general term. Usually, by the time I'm close enough to sweep, the opponent is already too overwhelmed and not in a good position to sweep effectively anyway.

The last guy I fought tried to sweep me while fighting for a grab or control up top. Rather than tie up with him I just cleared to the outside and knocked him into the elliptical machine. Afterward he asked me why he was unable to sweep me and if I was using some rooting technique or something. But all I did was combine simple footwork and punching.

 

[KPM]

I'm not the one that has a limited view of simultaneous attack and defense requiring two arms. I just don't do superfluous actions.

No, it sounded like you were saying you wouldn't do two arms at once. Like I said, sometimes its hard to tell with you guys because you just denounce what someone else is saying without really explaining where you are coming from. But what is clear, is that you have a much narrower view of what "LSDD" refers to that everyone else here. I see it as having several layers. One of which is defending with one arm while striking with the other at the same time. Another is defending and striking at the same time with the same arm. Another is angling off-line with a strike at just the right moment so that you don't even engage the striking arm at all.