One good reason for an angled stance.
- Thread starter lansao
- Start date
Well, it does follow mathematical rules, but you're not...
A = jab
So
A1 = jab moving forward
A2 = jab moving backwards
A3 = jab moving left
A7 = jab moving 30° forward left
And so on.
Each of those can be weighted depending on what you're doing at the time
Say
B= avoiding by stepping
B1 = avoiding backwards
B2 = avoiding forwards
Etc.
Now, A2 (say weighted as 3) against B1 (say weighted as -3.5) = -0.5
You didn't get jabbed.
Now throw in Q/H (amount of sleep against time since waking) to give a weighting for or against L (relative reaction time based against a baseline) which counterweights your B1 +0.7
You got hit, then stepped back.
Oh, but your opponent's Q/H.L gave him -1.1
You didn't get jabbed.
But he decided the jab was a feint for a side kick, say F.
.......
Swapping lies and hiding secrets. You forgot those.
OP
lansao
Purple Belt
- Thread Starter
- #104
Side note too, I don't mean to throw around math like it's some kind of smarty pants thing. More than anything, I hope this makes that kind of math more approachable.
I've thought of teaching an integrated approach of music theory, pure math, and Wing Chun in large part because of how much they really do have in common. That I could get kids a little more comfortable with math because they have a complex but relatable enough example in kung fu to help them make connections. Get excited about kung fu because they see how they can improve their musicianship ("slow is fast", "simplicity of movement").
If I could retire from work and do one thing with my time, it would be teaching this integrated approach (preferably to disadvantaged kids who need to be told with confidence that they're not dumb). To extend the value of the martial art across other domains and benefit them through the fascinating and beautiful ways all of these things interweave.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 14,101
- Reaction score
- 6,015
I can't use bridging because Wing Chun bridging is not the same as Jow Ga kung fu bridging. The concept is the same but the delivery isn't. In Jow Ga our bridging isn't in such a tight area because it's a circular system, so we have to be able to do bridge work that is away from our center. As an outsider looking in. Wing Chun seems to collapse the opponent with the bridge work. In Jow Ga we tend to open an opponent with ours.
Here's how Jow Ga sees that scenario without punching. If your left arm has made contact then I'm going to use my right arm to main contact and redirect your left arm so I can isolate it. I will either isolate it by grabbing it or repositioning it. I DO NOT, NOT EVER need to get my other hand into the bridge. My free hand is for punching, defending, preventing and escaping should an extra hand be required. This isn't a wrong or right issue. It is just one that would reduce the ability to follow up with a Jow Ga technique if I took the same approach as you described for Wing Chun. If you look at Jow Ga forms you will see a lot of one hand bridging. We do have two hand bridging techniques but each hand takes a hand vs switching bridges.
With Jow Ga the student should be able to attack with the bridging hand without any help from the other hand. By the way I'm going to review some of my other videos to make sure that I'm not talking crap. lol. I think there was one incident where I did switch hands like you stated. I probably picked up some bad habits from all the wing chun people here lol. (just went back.to review the video. I didn't do the same thing as wing chun." It was a bridge but not how you described. In the video I didn't switch my bridge. I used my right and to defend and distract while my left hand secured the bridge. I thought I was switching but I wasn't
Jabbing is going to be fairly similar across different systems in terms of use and delivery which is why I picked Jabbing. Bridging tends to follow system based concepts more so than what jabbing does. It's the technique with the least variance.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 14,101
- Reaction score
- 6,015
ha ha ha. I'll put it this way. The math that you put is small compared to some of the formulas and equations that have popped up around on Martial Talk.
I think this is more applicable to Forms. Forms tend to be more rigid and the student has to move into certain positions, punches have to be at certain angles, structure has to be certain way. Martial arts forms are great for concepts and approaches that one can build off of simply because they are constant. It's a good thing because it provides a solid starting point. It's a bad thing because some people think that's the only way to do it, and any variation of that technique is wrong or doesn't work. I've seen variation of Jow Ga techniques in both Korean and Japanese martial arts. It wasn't how Jow Ga teaches it, but the variation that they used was a working one.
ha ha ha..I've written a chapter on just how to make 2 types of fists. So far the second type of fist is 5 pages long simply on the structure of the fist and I'm not finished yet. So I've been trying to reduce it and making sure that I only include things that are needed.I need a great big blackboard to quantify a one punch, one kick exchange
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 14,101
- Reaction score
- 6,015
Problem is most schools teach System A vs System A, so when it's System A vs System B. Those drills don't calculate. The abstract is rarely taught, students usually pick up that on their own through exploration. It seems like an easy thing, but from teaching martial arts, it seems that students make it harder than what it needs to be in terms of making that jump from drill concept to real world application. Some how it always tends to turn into "I'm waiting for my opponent to do A so I can do B." I used to be like that as well but that's before I sat down and really tried to understand what it is that I'm doing outside of what the drill is showing.
But I agree with you with the. bite size movements. "be like water" lol see another interpretation. We'll probably get 4 more the end of next week lol.
But if you want to math a fight or sparring session, you can't leave anything out.
That's what I meant when I said it's not a 1+1 situation.
Assigning a number to something is simple(ish), weighting it with variables and putting that against something else is, well, something else.
It's still doable though.
So, everything can be solved and/or quantified with maths.
Anyone who says otherwise just doesn't know enough maths.
(Oh, and BTW, that comment earlier about 2+2 not being 4 because someone adds another number is poor - because 2+2 is just 2+2. If another number is put in it becomes a different equation...)
This is why the move toward your opponent's side door (blind side) is a good strategy.
OP
lansao
Purple Belt
- Thread Starter
- #113
Another thought! Machine learning could teach us something interesting too. There are ML algorithms that are able to classify video. We could feed ML algorithms footage of every recorded fight and it would be able to run an unsupervised learning algorithm against it to find clusters in time series. Like, there'd be a cluster for lead jabs that look similar. You could provide cleaner training data if two partners wore 3d gyroscopic trackers on their shoulders, elbows, wrists, forehead, chin, hips, knees, and ankles.
This kind of information would also feed well into what's called a Markov chain to tell us what the responses are that have most often led to successful counter. This would be less about trying to calculate movements from paper to action than recording action and feeding it into a computer that could find interesting patterns that we might not think of ourselves. Would also make for good video game/simulator content
And another thought! Learning Wing Chun for me was never about fighting competitively. It was always about trying to be a better version of myself by reducing fear through understanding and disciplined practice centered on something I was terrified of, physical violence. Math has reduced my fear dramatically through understanding and disciplined practice centered on another thing I was terrified of, intellectual inferiority. That others knew something I didn't and wasn't part of the smart kid's club. That I wouldn't see the world in ways that others could and would lose out on that experience; or that I would be tricked/taken-advantage-of by people who knew it and saw more than I did.
I'm word vomiting a bit but the wife just left for the beach with the 3-yo so I have time to wax poetic.
This kind of information would also feed well into what's called a Markov chain to tell us what the responses are that have most often led to successful counter. This would be less about trying to calculate movements from paper to action than recording action and feeding it into a computer that could find interesting patterns that we might not think of ourselves. Would also make for good video game/simulator content
And another thought! Learning Wing Chun for me was never about fighting competitively. It was always about trying to be a better version of myself by reducing fear through understanding and disciplined practice centered on something I was terrified of, physical violence. Math has reduced my fear dramatically through understanding and disciplined practice centered on another thing I was terrified of, intellectual inferiority. That others knew something I didn't and wasn't part of the smart kid's club. That I wouldn't see the world in ways that others could and would lose out on that experience; or that I would be tricked/taken-advantage-of by people who knew it and saw more than I did.
I'm word vomiting a bit but the wife just left for the beach with the 3-yo so I have time to wax poetic.
Which is pretty accurate.
It's how all living things are categorised, but using words...
So for fauna (flora is slightly different, but sane structure) you have Kingdom : phylum : class : order : family : genus : species : subspecies : variant.
You can use the same structure for any technique, then apply an abbreviation, then assign a personal base number, then weight that number with variables that affect effectiveness...
I can see that spending time together, you and I will blather about many topics, Alan. I suspect, if you were to complete an assessment on motivators (based on Spranger/Allport model), you'd also be a high-Theoretical.Another thought! Machine learning could teach us something interesting too. There are ML algorithms that are able to classify video. We could feed ML algorithms footage of every recorded fight and it would be able to run an unsupervised learning algorithm against it to find clusters in time series. Like, there'd be a cluster for lead jabs that look similar. You could provide cleaner training data if two partners wore 3d gyroscopic trackers on their shoulders, elbows, wrists, forehead, chin, hips, knees, and ankles.
This kind of information would also feed well into what's called a Markov chain to tell us what the responses are that have most often led to successful counter. This would be less about trying to calculate movements from paper to action than recording action and feeding it into a computer that could find interesting patterns that we might not think of ourselves. Would also make for good video game/simulator content
And another thought! Learning Wing Chun for me was never about fighting competitively. It was always about trying to be a better version of myself by reducing fear through understanding and disciplined practice centered on something I was terrified of, physical violence. Math has reduced my fear dramatically through understanding and disciplined practice centered on another thing I was terrified of, intellectual inferiority. That others knew something I didn't and wasn't part of the smart kid's club. That I wouldn't see the world in ways that others could and would lose out on that experience; or that I would be tricked/taken-advantage-of by people who knew it and saw more than I did.
I'm word vomiting a bit but the wife just left for the beach with the 3-yo so I have time to wax poetic.
If you want, I can send you an assessment link.
Sent in PM.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 14,101
- Reaction score
- 6,015
Oh ok. I misunderstood before. That's why I was saying that for forms one could show the math because Forms would be constant enough.
No it's actually an accurate example. If I see that you are planning a specific attack or defense, then I already know that you are expecting a specific out come. I can literally show how this plays out through in one of my videos. In the video.
My plan was 1+2=3. As long as she threw 1 straight jab I could do 2 things (redirect and counter with a hook) as a response. I had planned for the exchange to consist of 3 actions that would get me to my target. She threw in an additional action so instead of 1+2 she gave me a 2+2 She did her 2nd action the same time I did mine and we hit each other in the head at the same time. I think it took me 3 punches to my face to understand that 2+3= 5 is what I should have used against her.
1+2 = 3 works, but not against her or anyone who decides to throw more than 1 punch. After that I paid more attention to her. I could tell when she was going to try something new. When I picked that up I added another action to the equation because I knew it would mess up her calculation. Keep in mind that none of this is math. It's sensory. I have an theory / concept about patterns that I use when I fight. Basically if I can identify the pattern then I can exploit that pattern and know how many actions it will take for me to hit my target.
I actually typed it up here (it was long) but when I hit "Post Reply" it showed that i was logged out. Now I'm tired and have no interest in typing all of that out again.
