Wing chun footwork

[APL76]

That is not at all what my post meant to imply...



It was just to point out that even (most of) SN's students nowadays have modified their teachings.

And if one wants to learn the traditional way, it would be better to learn from the Pang family than the more commercially oriented mou goons.

I hope this clariefies the issue.

yeah, Sorry, it was after I posted it that I realised my comment could be construed as a bit of a smart **** comment. I didn't mean it to be and totally understand your comment.

In terms of my friend learning from one of Sigung's older sons (I can never remember his name),,, My friend went around and had a look at a lot of wing chun, a number of Sigung's disciples (and wing chun not connected to Sum Nung), and he figured that Sigung's son was the one to learn from (and my friend is very, very, very experienced in some Japanese martial arts, so he is definitely no naïve person to be taken in by gimmicks). From what he told me it seems a lot of them operate the commercial school and then may take private students. And what they teach in private is of a different level to the public stuff. And I agree that to teach Guangzhou style wing chun in a commercial class context it would have to be modified in order to make it accessible to most people.

That makes sense and is exactly how my sifu did it when he operated his school. the difference with my sifu though is that in the commercial school he taught the Yip Man style of wing chun. Those of us he chose to teach privately trained at his home, it was entirely separate from the school (though we did train the Guangzhou stuff in he class too). When we learned the Guangzhou style at his house it was in the traditional way.

 

[jlq]

No problem at all, appreciate the clarification, though.

The name of the elder son is Sum Siu Wai (岑 兆 伟).

 

[APL76]

No problem at all, appreciate the clarification, though.

The name of the elder son is Sum Siu Wai (岑 兆 伟).

I suspect you also learn YKS wing chun?

 

[jlq]

Up until a few years ago, yes. I live in Gongjaau and know quite a few people who practice Gong Fu here.

 

[VPT]

I finally figured out how to say what was bugging me with the YKS approach. Doing so much of standing around is and might always be a waste of time for me. Martial arts is living and moving and not about standing in one place "developing one's kung fu".

If you do four months of stance training, you waste four months not learning how not to get punched in the face. You are not learning how to deal with people actually trying to hurt you. When you finally get to move yourself around, you are still at step one at fighting: one might know how to punch, but he/she would still be a sucker at dealing with punches. To prioritize stance training is to disregard the more important 50 % that makes up martial arts: protecting oneself from people putting effort in physical harm.

 

[pdg]

If you do four months of stance training, you waste four months not learning how not to get punched in the face. You are not learning how to deal with people actually trying to hurt you

If that's your motivation for learning the (any) art then that might be the case.

But what about the majority of people who aren't in it for that particular reason?




Edit: to qualify my use of "majority" - it's based on the sample of people I've spoken to - a very very small percentage cite defence as their reasoning.

 

[VPT]

If that's your motivation for learning the (any) art then that might be the case.

But what about the majority of people who aren't in it for that particular reason?




Edit: to qualify my use of "majority" - it's based on the sample of people I've spoken to - a very very small percentage cite defence as their reasoning.

I often use "hurting" and "punching in the face" as less-than-creative ways to paraphrase the intention of a live sparring situation. (And specifically one including some sort of protective gear, to elaborate. Barefist sparring is something I have too little experience to consider properly, although there is a very skilled Seven Star Mantis group around where I usually roam who engage in that.)

If I would train for self-defence only, I would drop all my kung fu right away. But since I don't, I keep training it. However, if people are not in martial arts for a live sparring context, their training should still be organized in the way that makes it possible for those who desire that. Training martial arts and not actually training "fighting" (hate that word) is like having a band and playing full gigs at an empty garage, or making a three-course meal for yourself and just eating the first course.

 

[pdg]

I often use "hurting" and "punching in the face" as less-than-creative ways to paraphrase the intention of a live sparring situation. (And specifically one including some sort of protective gear, to elaborate. Barefist sparring is something I have too little experience to consider properly, although there is a very skilled Seven Star Mantis group around where I usually roam who engage in that.)

If I would train for self-defence only, I would drop all my kung fu right away. But since I don't, I keep training it. However, if people are not in martial arts for a live sparring context, their training should still be organized in the way that makes it possible for those who desire that. Training martial arts and not actually training "fighting" (hate that word) is like having a band and playing full gigs at an empty garage, or making a three-course meal for yourself and just eating the first course.

Seems I misunderstood your use of those words then

But, if that's how some arts are structured I can't personally say they're wrong for the practitioners - but they'd likely be wrong for me (and you, by the sound of things).

 

[VPT]

Seems I misunderstood your use of those words then

But, if that's how some arts are structured I can't personally say they're wrong for the practitioners - but they'd likely be wrong for me (and you, by the sound of things).

Maybe more like wrong for this day and age, when both the equipment and the knowledge regarding how to conduct athletic training in general and in martial arts have taken massive leaps forward. This, however, does not change the core substance of those arts - strategy and techniques and relevant knowledge of the human body - that continue even in our day to be "functional technology" (to use Dan Djurdjevic's term).

 

[APL76]

I think you are not understanding the process that training goes through. Rather than think of it as standing around and not training 50% of important stuff, its better to think of it as a short term sacrifice for higher long term payoff. One learns things much more slowly in the beginning stages but much more quickly later; and the standard is much higher. As for that kind of training not being right for this day and age. Like what one of my students says to that, unless people have evolved to have an extra arm and or leg there's still nothing people could do to hurt you that they haven't been able to do since the emergence of modern humans. Unless you have done that kind of training you wont understand it or know the difference it makes.

 

[Eddie Chan]

So how exactly does wing chun footwork work? Is there any footwork really in wing chun? Most of it seems like just the arms. How do you move and close the gap or make room in wing chun?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

"Yi Chi Kim Yeung Ma" is the Wing Chun footwork which is very important. One'd loses his balance easily as well as the power without this footwork. This footwork is like the skiing gesture. It achieves the stability. Many people think that it is NOT practical with "Yi Chi Kim Yeung Ma" when sparring. Yes or No? The answer is No! They simply don't understand. The usage or the purpose of it is different between the form and sparring. If you don't have good footwork, you will lose balance easily especially when your opponent gives you a push.

You have the answer to "To move and close the gap". It is simply a move. There are basically 2 ways to move. You move towards your opponent or you pull your opponent to get closer. The other way is when your opponent moves to push you. In these moves, the gap is closed. However, you need to ensure this move is done side way not straight forward.

Finally, the footwork helps you to generate more power.
I really want to share with you more but it is limited in words.

 

[Eddie Chan]

I don't know, I'm betting that YKS WC has pretty strong footwork training. And it's probably pretty different from what I learned in WT. There's gotta be somebody on this forum who can weigh in! I'll sit back and wait.

Yes, YKS footwork is a bit different from Ip Man lineage. It turns on toe according to the "Yi Chi Kim Yeung Ma". There is reason of it! I'll only explain to people face to face then they will understand easily.

 

[Eddie Chan]

So how exactly does wing chun footwork work? Is there any footwork really in wing chun? Most of it seems like just the arms. How do you move and close the gap or make room in wing chun?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Though I have posted my sharing previously, I would like to add a bit more on footwork that you are talking about. When you are asking about footwork, I think you are probably asking two things 1) footwork (stance and move) and 2) kicking. I shared about footwork. I come from YKS WC lineage. My understanding is that there are 3 kicking techniques. 1). "Tiger Tail" 2) "Poking Heart" 3) "Horizontal Nail". I am sorry if I can't translate it in English correctly.

 

[geezer]

... I'll only explain to people face to face then they will understand easily.

Wise choice.

 

[Highlander]

So how exactly does wing chun footwork work? Is there any footwork really in wing chun? Most of it seems like just the arms. How do you move and close the gap or make room in wing chun?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

As far as HOWS it's done differs from lineage to lineage and person to person. And its hard to teach or explain through text.

For the question of IF there is footwork in WT. Of course, but it starts off very simple. Learning to step straight into the opponent from different ranges while staying behind your body and elbows. A lot of the more advanced footwork is held off till the higher level forms. Which makes the system feel... linear... at first. This is done to ensure the student has a solid understanding of how to move while staying balanced behind their structure. We can look at the feet just like we look at the hands. When we first learn to punch we learn one direction to move, straight down the center, then we learn the lifting upper cut. Then we learn the hook. At first these seem like new methods of attack. But as you train and really dig into them you realize its the same punch just thrown at new angles.
We first must learn to step and move in a linear direct fashion. Only after we get good at that can we hope to start moving in other directions. The footwork is actually very free and flexible once you get deep into it (just like the hands).
I'll leave you with two quotes I believe answer the question simply.
"The feet unlock the hands"
"There are no advanced techniques in WT, just basics applied at higher levels."

 

[drop bear]

 

[Highlander]

Annnnd just saw how old this thread is

 

[Danny T]

Old friend, Dr. Chris Ash...very nice gentleman.
His wing chun, meh. His Pekiti-Tirsia, ooh...much better!

 

[paitingman]

I think footwork training is a crux for many traditional stylists.

IMO, it is much easier to train and attain the skills of footwork, distance, and body angle manipulation than it is to attain the skills of stance, structure, and dominating this gate and that gate, and arm fighting angles.

Those who start footwork training day one will find that it's not that hard and their skills will progress quickly and they'll quickly learn to fight this way. I have found they progress much faster and their competence develops much sooner.

Taking the long road could have its rewards.
It's two different mentalities.
There are those who hop in the car and start driving day one and try to develop their skills as a driver.
And there are those whose day one was in the garage and they started trying to build a bad@ss car.

 

[Martial D]

I think footwork training is a crux for many traditional stylists.

IMO, it is much easier to train and attain the skills of footwork, distance, and body angle manipulation than it is to attain the skills of stance, structure, and dominating this gate and that gate, and arm fighting angles.

Those who start footwork training day one will find that it's not that hard and their skills will progress quickly and they'll quickly learn to fight this way. I have found they progress much faster and their competence develops much sooner.

Taking the long road could have its rewards.
It's two different mentalities.
There are those who hop in the car and start driving day one and try to develop their skills as a driver.
And there are those whose day one was in the garage and they started trying to build a bad@ss car.

Both of those options are kinda messed up though, if you want to develop functional skills, I would say.

If you train distance and angles only, you will lack timing and technique.

If you train technique only and forego distance, angles, and timing, you will end up with cool looking, yet harmless technique.

If you train the first, followed by the second, you will have to unlearn the sloppy techniques you were using to replace them with the proper ones, which triples the workload.

If you learn the technique first, you will have to relearn them anyway due to completely different execution.

Both. Same time. Timing, too.