Why do we use long moves

[KnightlyMongoose]

As far as I can tell most northern Chinese systems utilize really "long" moves and stances that seem to transcend practicality. I have been told that we use long stances simply to increase the exercise benefits and power of our legs. But what about all the long blocks that seem to take forever to get to where they are going? I try to understand the applications of all the moves in the forms I learn and I can use (or at least understand how to use) most of them, but it seems like it would be far better to shorten them 90% of the time. Yet so many systems use the idea of long techniques, so they must have some practical purpose right? Anyone have any ideas?

 

[Flying Crane]

Long techniques enable you to generate power in a maximum sort of way. You practice the long movements as they are sort of the theoretical "idea" for the technique. This ingrains the movement and principles into how you move.

In application, usually these movements need to be shortened or otherwise modified to be practical. But since you have trained them in their ideal extreme, you can always shorten them down. If you only practice them short, you will never be able to work the long movements if you need to.

In addition, having learned to develop tremendous power thru the long movements, you can still utilize that power even when you shorten the movement. But if you only practiced them short, you would never learn to fully develop that power.

 

[MarkBarlow]

I'm sure this is a gross generalization but it probably holds a grain of truth, anyway, it's the explanation I was given.

Diet and heredity led to most Chinese from the north being taller than their southern counterparts. Also, the climate was colder so they wore heavier clothing. Put these two factors together and you have longer reach and clothing that would inhibit small movements therefore, long moves were used.

 

[Xue Sheng]

As far as I can tell most northern Chinese systems utilize really "long" moves and stances that seem to transcend practicality. I have been told that we use long stances simply to increase the exercise benefits and power of our legs. But what about all the long blocks that seem to take forever to get to where they are going? I try to understand the applications of all the moves in the forms I learn and I can use (or at least understand how to use) most of them, but it seems like it would be far better to shorten them 90% of the time. Yet so many systems use the idea of long techniques, so they must have some practical purpose right? Anyone have any ideas?

Just as a note; Shuaijiao, Taijiquan, Xingyiquan Baguazhang and Yiquan are all Northern styles. And to say most Northern styles says you have seen most Northern styles, which I find unlikely. Long Fist is likely closest to what you describe but the Wushu variety and the actual fighting variety are rather different.

As to differences between southern and northern styles and the approach to fighting, look at the terrain they were designed for; city streets verses open spaces

 

[zDom]

Long techniques enable you to generate power in a maximum sort of way. You practice the long movements as they are sort of the theoretical "idea" for the technique. This ingrains the movement and principles into how you move.

In application, usually these movements need to be shortened or otherwise modified to be practical. But since you have trained them in their ideal extreme, you can always shorten them down. If you only practice them short, you will never be able to work the long movements if you need to.

In addition, having learned to develop tremendous power thru the long movements, you can still utilize that power even when you shorten the movement. But if you only practiced them short, you would never learn to fully develop that power.

Well explained. While I study KMAs, we train large movements based on those same principles.

Also, I've heard it further explained that under stress, people tend to shorten/tighten their movements. If you START (i.e. train) with a small movement and then it is made smaller during a stressful situation, it may end up too small to be effective.

 

[Steel Tiger]

I had always believed that the numerous long swinging punches so common in Changquan and its descendants resulted from wholely practical reasons. Heavy cotton coats that restricted the motion of the elbows.

Xue pointed out a number of arts, mainly internal I noticed, that are northern and do not have these 'long' movements. If anything they are rather close range arts.

I can, however, see exactly where FC is coming from. Generally power comes from contact before full extension because at full extension we are beginning to retract so lose power. It is much easier to adjust range than to adjust technique. May be that is why Changquan has been so successful over the centuries.

 

[count]

Bingo,

Long power at a short range. All northern systems fight from a close range to no range.

It's a classic "don't look at the finger or your will miss the moon in it's heavenly glory"

Punching isn't necessarily with the fist but can be with a forearm or sholder. My sifu used to say, "why should I go all the way downtown to the main bank when I can just use the atm."

Of course you can adjust depending on your range.

 

[Changhfy]

Hey everyone,

I have studied quite a few northern systems including Tong Bei, Taiji, Qi Xing Tang Lang, Bei Shaolin, some Bagua and have researched a number of others.

Based on my perspective, I believe that its not so much the clothing that influenced the movements (although that may have some level of influence) but it seems that the longer movements its more a way to express the body mechanics and gross motor skills. Also a way to develop fa ging (fa jing) transmission.

I've seen quite a number of high level Masters of the northern systems and generally speaking they would apply their methods from the northern systems with short range skills as opposed to long.

But the student in the beginning has to learn the methods before he/she can apply them at a closer range. Thats my .02 cents based on my experience.


take care,
Zach

 

[Yeti]

In addition, having learned to develop tremendous power thru the long movements, you can still utilize that power even when you shorten the movement. But if you only practiced them short, you would never learn to fully develop that power.

That's my take on it too. One of the first things we are taught in CLF is that all long leads to short. Didn't make any sense to me either at first, but now that I've been doing for a while, I'm becoming enlightened.

 

[Mantis77]

As far as I can tell most northern Chinese systems utilize really "long" moves and stances that seem to transcend practicality. I have been told that we use long stances simply to increase the exercise benefits and power of our legs. But what about all the long blocks that seem to take forever to get to where they are going? I try to understand the applications of all the moves in the forms I learn and I can use (or at least understand how to use) most of them, but it seems like it would be far better to shorten them 90% of the time. Yet so many systems use the idea of long techniques, so they must have some practical purpose right? Anyone have any ideas?

I've also heard that in forms movements are big and open for the health benefits and in fighting the techniques are smaller for proper application.

 

[Mantismaster]

Hello to all:

With my experience in 7-Star Mantis doing techniques long range also teaches you how to chase your opponent as he is trying to retreat, by doing this it also creates confusion (like an optical illusion) which in term, drives your opponent into the path of your devastating techniques. To master any art you need to master all the ranges of combat, especially mantis.

Peace
Mantismaster

 

[tellner]

It's a standard training method. Beginners get exaggerated, elongated movements. It's easier to learn and get the basic motions. The better you are, the smaller they get. If a newbie saw what a master does he wouldn't get anything out of it.

 

[kidswarrior]

Long techniques enable you to generate power in a maximum sort of way. You practice the long movements as they are sort of the theoretical "idea" for the technique. This ingrains the movement and principles into how you move.

In application, usually these movements need to be shortened or otherwise modified to be practical. But since you have trained them in their ideal extreme, you can always shorten them down. If you only practice them short, you will never be able to work the long movements if you need to.

In addition, having learned to develop tremendous power thru the long movements, you can still utilize that power even when you shorten the movement. But if you only practiced them short, you would never learn to fully develop that power.

All true, in my experience. Even though my brand of kung fu would probably be considered more southern.

While I study KMAs, we train large movements based on those same principles.

Also, I've heard it further explained that under stress, people tend to shorten/tighten their movements. If you START (i.e. train) with a small movement and then it is made smaller during a stressful situation, it may end up too small to be effective.

Probably explains what my GM is really thinking when he says *In forms, we go slow and make our movements (blocks, mostly) 'flowery', but we wouldn't do that in real situations*

 

[Formosa Neijia]

As far as I can tell most northern Chinese systems utilize really "long" moves and stances that seem to transcend practicality. I have been told that we use long stances simply to increase the exercise benefits and power of our legs. But what about all the long blocks that seem to take forever to get to where they are going? I try to understand the applications of all the moves in the forms I learn and I can use (or at least understand how to use) most of them, but it seems like it would be far better to shorten them 90% of the time. Yet so many systems use the idea of long techniques, so they must have some practical purpose right? Anyone have any ideas?

Sorry to resurrect a dead thread.

I was taught that the moves in northern systems like long fist and pigua are designed to open up the body. This is why long fist is the basis for modern wushu. It opens you up, gets rid of tension, and develops the "kungfu body" faster than any other style of movement. This is why kids are taught long fist.

Once the opening up is achieved, the long moves still have some practicality as they are for different reasons.

One is physical culture. Some of the moves don't have an application -- they are there just to develop the body. Han Ching-tan's long fist system has many moves like that.

Second is that many of those long moves aren't what they seem in application. Many of them are throws or sweeps but they look like blocks or something else in the form. Unfortunately few people are taught the real way to fight using northern systems like long fist so this isn't common knowledge.

 

[kidswarrior]

Second is that many of those long moves aren't what they seem in application. Many of them are throws or sweeps but they look like blocks or something else in the form. Unfortunately few people are taught the real way to fight using northern systems like long fist so this isn't common knowledge.

Just from my You tube 'education' in a smattering of Northern Arts--courtesy of many knowledgeable people here at MT--I'd say you may be on to something.

Couple this with the Japanese/Okinawan/Korean MA bunkai revolutionaries, mostly young British karateka, and their reverse engineering discoveries (Abernethy leads the charge, with Burgar, Kane and Wilder, John Titchen, and many more on his heels) in which they point out such things as what is perhaps often taught as a block to a kick, is in reality something quite different (a la the sweeps and throws you mentioned), and I think their body of work backs up your hypothesis.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Couple this with the Japanese/Okinawan/Korean MA bunkai revolutionaries, mostly young British karateka, and their reverse engineering discoveries (Abernethy leads the charge, with Burgar, Kane and Wilder, John Titchen, and many more on his heels) in which they point out such things as what is perhaps often taught as a block to a kick, is in reality something quite different (a la the sweeps and throws you mentioned), and I think their body of work backs up your hypothesis.

It is interesting that you mention this as I have always been taught to not block kicks, you can break fingers or worse, and yet in the more fundamental forms I teach there are elements that clearly look like they should be used to block kicks. But when you examine them from the point of view of not blocking kicks with hands and arms you come to very different conclusions about them. Most end up as some form of takedown or throw.

It is the movement associated with the element that gives you the clues to what is really going on. Oblique and diagonal movements forward are usually seen with these elements which, I think, are a clear indication that the technique is of an offensive bent.

 

[kidswarrior]

It is interesting that you mention this as I have always been taught to not block kicks, you can break fingers or worse, and yet in the more fundamental forms I teach there are elements that clearly look like they should be used to block kicks. But when you examine them from the point of view of not blocking kicks with hands and arms you come to very different conclusions about them. Most end up as some form of takedown or throw.

It is the movement associated with the element that gives you the clues to what is really going on. Oblique and diagonal movements forward are usually seen with these elements which, I think, are a clear indication that the technique is of an offensive bent.

That's interesting. I'll be on the watch for those particular moves to see if they can be interpreted with more possibilities in mind.

 

[kidswarrior]

Oblique and diagonal movements forward are usually seen with these elements which, I think, are a clear indication that the technique is of an offensive bent.

The more I think about this, the more I think it's true. For example, the circular *blocks* (stop-hits, intercepts, whatever we really designate them) in Kung Fu San Soo, such as the windmills, are very often powerful enough to change the opponents whole body position, even turning him completely so now his back is to me and he's completely off-balanced. Follow-up take downs/knockdowns/slam downs are then pretty easy.

 

[Xue Sheng]

It has been my experience that the best way to block a kick is… well… with a kick or legs. If the hands are involved with kicks generally it is not a block, per say, but a redirection or a taking of control, if you will, but you are not blocking it and by blocking I mean stopping it from hitting you by putting your arm or hand in the way. But it is not outside the realm of possibility if that is all you have at the moment to stop a kick form hitting something vital.

There are many hand movements in Taiji that are misinterpreted as blocks for kicks when in reality in application they are more for taking control of your opponent and/or breaking his elbow or throwing and/or pushing away. There are also a few punches to the legs but they are not defensive they are offensive so I would not call them blocks and that is more along the lines of attempting to disable your opponents ability to kick.

 

[kidswarrior]

It has been my experience that the best way to block a kick is… well… with a kick or legs.

Yeah, faster, too, to just raise a leg to block. Then the counter-kick or a step to change position, is already set up, too. Good point.

But it is not outside the realm of possibility if that is all you have at the moment to stop a kick form hitting something vital.

Did this once a few years ago with a student I was testing (and 'sparring'--just putting him through his paces, really). I was tired, got lazy, and used hands to block a 320 pounder's kick. Broke three fingers, and had to get two rings resized. Was still better than letting the kick land, though, given it's target. :lol:

There are also a few punches to the legs but they are not defensive they are offensive so I would not call them blocks and that is more along the lines of attempting to disable your opponents ability to kick.

I love these. Many people underestimate such targets as mid-inside of thigh, inside of shin, back of calf, high-inside of thigh (femoral artery), inside of knee, and on and on.