So...
I am a strong proponent of/believer in center-line theory as it applies to Wing Chun, and even related Martial Arts. I believe that this is what makes Wing Chun work as a cohesive and viable system, and it's something that should not just be talked about in theory, but put into habitual practice. Centerline theory, which, I might to some degree be conflating with "facing" (chiu-ying? Not confident that I am remembering or spelling correctly the chinese term), describes a focus on, and occupation of the central line between myself and the opponent, and any force, as much as possible, should be towards my opponent on this line, not outwardly or inwardly past it. In this sense, every movement, and force, is directly threatening my opponent. This makes simultaneous attack and defense, and concepts such as lat-sao-jik-chung viable and automatic, and it tends to keep one safe from linear, and in many cases circular attacks that an opponent might launch.
I've found this utter and unrelenting insistence on chasing and occupying the centerline to be of huge advantage, both in an empty hand context, and in a historical fencing context. People have a natural tendency to over-react and want to "swat the flies" if you will, and I've had great success playing with other martial artists by simply yielding to any outwards force and entering as the center is opened for me by my opponent, or simply claiming the center first and hitting or thrusting while remaining on the line.
But there seems to be a middle ground where this insistence on the centerline, and on facing, doesn't work so well, and that is when short weapons, particularly short bladed weapons, are involved, and all the more so when an opponent is armed with a weapon of that description and you aren't. This is the realm of FMA, and, while centerline theory certainly is present there, I notice that it isn't always adhered to quite in the same way or with the same strictness as it is in Wing Chun.
Here's a concrete example. I have a very deadly habit of, even after all of the knife tapping and related training that I've done in FMA, habitually trying to use an inside gan-sau to cover wide low-line thusts against a knife wielding attacker. And, it never works. But it's such a habit for me, because I sense that I am on the centerline and have the advantage in position and facing, which I would in an unarmed context. Unfortunately, the added extension of a knife, and the consideration that forceful impact is not needed to cause severe damage, as with a punch, means that the opponent can simply thrust right around/through my defense. The much safer way of defending this, which is generally taught in FMA, is to use an outside gan-sau of sorts. But when the opponent is coming from such a wide angle, this means that you have to completely give up the centerline and turn to face the attack. Even a sideways step is not nearly enough (or quick enough, in many cases) to reorient your center such that you can bring the opposite hand into play to achieve an outside parry.
Now, I would never, ever turn my entire body to face and chase the hand if someone were throwing a wide, open punch in Wing Chun. I'd just enter, and, if necessary due to timing, put up a hand to intercept their attack. That is an ingrained habit at this point. But, one can see how it doesn't quite work when a knife is involved.
So, one winds up having to completely change facing, give up the centerline, and in effect "chase hands" to effectively defend from some attacks when there is a knife. Not to mention that having the hands themselves be cut is now a pertinent concern which, again, makes many Wing Chun habits potentially dangerous.
Interestingly enough, Wing Chun's principles and theories work excellently where long bladed weapons are concerned - especially those with developed hand-guards which can be safely used in a very linear fashion, as is the case in historical fencing however. Again, at this point, both practitioners have reach and matched weapon sets such that a focus on the core/centerline is once again possible. The hands are of course vulnerable, but staying outside of measure and attempting to snipe the hands is not the goal; one might as well with draw the hand or disengage entirely from such an opponent, and such attempts can be used to gain leverage on the strong of your sword, bind, and enter with a direct thrust regardless. Wing Chun and fencing are so similar in principle and function, in fact, that I consider them to be utterly the same in concept and principle, just with slightly different weapons and mechanics involved.
So, how does one deal with this awkward mismatched middle ground that knife defense occupies, where my habits and mentality from Wing Chun seem to hinder rather than help? Is there a way to rectify these discrepancies without compromising my habits for one or the other?
I am a strong proponent of/believer in center-line theory as it applies to Wing Chun, and even related Martial Arts. I believe that this is what makes Wing Chun work as a cohesive and viable system, and it's something that should not just be talked about in theory, but put into habitual practice. Centerline theory, which, I might to some degree be conflating with "facing" (chiu-ying? Not confident that I am remembering or spelling correctly the chinese term), describes a focus on, and occupation of the central line between myself and the opponent, and any force, as much as possible, should be towards my opponent on this line, not outwardly or inwardly past it. In this sense, every movement, and force, is directly threatening my opponent. This makes simultaneous attack and defense, and concepts such as lat-sao-jik-chung viable and automatic, and it tends to keep one safe from linear, and in many cases circular attacks that an opponent might launch.
I've found this utter and unrelenting insistence on chasing and occupying the centerline to be of huge advantage, both in an empty hand context, and in a historical fencing context. People have a natural tendency to over-react and want to "swat the flies" if you will, and I've had great success playing with other martial artists by simply yielding to any outwards force and entering as the center is opened for me by my opponent, or simply claiming the center first and hitting or thrusting while remaining on the line.
But there seems to be a middle ground where this insistence on the centerline, and on facing, doesn't work so well, and that is when short weapons, particularly short bladed weapons, are involved, and all the more so when an opponent is armed with a weapon of that description and you aren't. This is the realm of FMA, and, while centerline theory certainly is present there, I notice that it isn't always adhered to quite in the same way or with the same strictness as it is in Wing Chun.
Here's a concrete example. I have a very deadly habit of, even after all of the knife tapping and related training that I've done in FMA, habitually trying to use an inside gan-sau to cover wide low-line thusts against a knife wielding attacker. And, it never works. But it's such a habit for me, because I sense that I am on the centerline and have the advantage in position and facing, which I would in an unarmed context. Unfortunately, the added extension of a knife, and the consideration that forceful impact is not needed to cause severe damage, as with a punch, means that the opponent can simply thrust right around/through my defense. The much safer way of defending this, which is generally taught in FMA, is to use an outside gan-sau of sorts. But when the opponent is coming from such a wide angle, this means that you have to completely give up the centerline and turn to face the attack. Even a sideways step is not nearly enough (or quick enough, in many cases) to reorient your center such that you can bring the opposite hand into play to achieve an outside parry.
Now, I would never, ever turn my entire body to face and chase the hand if someone were throwing a wide, open punch in Wing Chun. I'd just enter, and, if necessary due to timing, put up a hand to intercept their attack. That is an ingrained habit at this point. But, one can see how it doesn't quite work when a knife is involved.
So, one winds up having to completely change facing, give up the centerline, and in effect "chase hands" to effectively defend from some attacks when there is a knife. Not to mention that having the hands themselves be cut is now a pertinent concern which, again, makes many Wing Chun habits potentially dangerous.
Interestingly enough, Wing Chun's principles and theories work excellently where long bladed weapons are concerned - especially those with developed hand-guards which can be safely used in a very linear fashion, as is the case in historical fencing however. Again, at this point, both practitioners have reach and matched weapon sets such that a focus on the core/centerline is once again possible. The hands are of course vulnerable, but staying outside of measure and attempting to snipe the hands is not the goal; one might as well with draw the hand or disengage entirely from such an opponent, and such attempts can be used to gain leverage on the strong of your sword, bind, and enter with a direct thrust regardless. Wing Chun and fencing are so similar in principle and function, in fact, that I consider them to be utterly the same in concept and principle, just with slightly different weapons and mechanics involved.
So, how does one deal with this awkward mismatched middle ground that knife defense occupies, where my habits and mentality from Wing Chun seem to hinder rather than help? Is there a way to rectify these discrepancies without compromising my habits for one or the other?