chain-punching damagewise.

[Vajramusti]

So when you suggest this.

A WC punch is weird though. It's not about throwing your weight behind it, it's more about keeping your weight behind it. So a lot of the body "english" you use in other punches isn't there. Now there are stronger punches out there no doubt, but in a crush it can still be viable. Now there are limits of course but there is a reason some people describe WC as being an art one can use in a bathroom stall. Here is a video that I think illustrates the nature of the punching fairly well.

Is technically different to any other punch. It is me changing the goal posts.

That is Lui Ming Fai- a Ho Kam Ming protégé.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It could be solved by anybody coming up to the plate and suggesting how they do fight if it was different. You know an actual counter argument.

Surprised that did not happen 20 posts ago.

It could, and the fact that those who seem to actually understand the style haven't leads me to believe they don't disagree.

 

[drop bear]

That is Lui Ming Fai- a Ho Kam Ming protégé.

I have no issue with his punching. Good punching is good punching. What he is doing there is contrary to juanny,s description. In that he is using pretty standard hip rotation and shoulder movement to get power.

 

[drop bear]

It could, and the fact that those who seem to actually understand the style haven't leads me to believe they don't disagree.

Which was an attempt at having a normal conversation about striking before i basically became part of a shaggy song.



To be a true player you have to know how to play
If she say a night, convince her say a day
Never admit to a word when she say and if she claims
And you tell her baby no way

But she caught me on the counter (It wasn't me)
Saw me bangin' on the sofa (It wasn't me)]
I even had her in the shower (It wasn't me)
She even caught me on camera (It wasn't me)

She saw the marks on my shoulder (It wasn't me)
Heard the words that I told her (It wasn't me)
Heard the scream get louder (It wasn't me)

 

[Juany118]

So when you suggest this.

A WC punch is weird though. It's not about throwing your weight behind it, it's more about keeping your weight behind it. So a lot of the body "english" you use in other punches isn't there. Now there are stronger punches out there no doubt, but in a crush it can still be viable. Now there are limits of course but there is a reason some people describe WC as being an art one can use in a bathroom stall. Here is a video that I think illustrates the nature of the punching fairly well.

Is technically different to any other punch. It is me changing the goal posts.

No because you don't always move goal posts but simply because someone doesn't always do something doesnt by definition mean "never" either. However here you are putting words in my mouth, something else you do (along with taking things out of context.)

I said the punch was "weird", that is different than saying "unique" but even if i had used that word it would not be entirely inaccurate.

The way the punch is applied; elbow down, fist vertical, little body english is what I said, no twisting of the wrist/ elbow as it travels to the target, rotation at the waist, the punch coming "from the heart" along the centerline, relaxing the striking limb immediately on impact. There are other nuances but these are the most obvious. Then you have the idea behind it, "keeping" your weight behind it, unlike others where by leaning into, or the body english already noted above have the practitioner "throwing" their weight behind it.

Also btw I NEVER said "no" shoulder rotation, you need shoulder rotation for a punch to have power. What you don't do is jack back, load, whatever that arm, the way you do with say a strong boxing punch. Part of that of course is due to the elbow position and straight nature of the punch limiting the amout of shoulder movement but I am really trying to figure out how you got specific rotations out of the term "body english."

Other arts have similar punches, but the key word is "similar", which doesn't mean identical. The differences are in all those little details being in the same place. Various arts do share traits with the WC punch but I challenge you to find an art whose punch shares ALL of the traits. If there isn't one then, according the Webster's, that makes it unique, though I prefer the term weird since there are ones that are similar.

 

[Juany118]

Double post.

 

[Juany118]

It could, and the fact that those who seem to actually understand the style haven't leads me to believe they don't disagree.

Like I said earlier, I think the issue was not defining "the pocket" in the beginning. Initially to me it meant staying in the opponents centerline plane, which we always want to get out of.

Once I realized that this was NOT what was meant, I agree WC/VT fights in the pocket (I think @Tony Dismukes gave the best definition. In my school we have "Rules of Engagement", the last one is "maintain constant contact." Once you enter combat you don't want to dance in and out of range, you wish to maintain pressure. Your opponent retreats you follow. The only time you back off is when you are getting overwhelmed and need to reset, and if that happens you are in trouble.

As it is taught to me (and remember even though my WC claims YM lineage, many do and yet are different) the reasons are as follows. The art is designed, in theory, to maximize striking and defense potential for a smaller person to address a larger person. The strikes are about keeping your weight/mass behind them far more than using muscle you might not have to "throw" the weight behind. Defenses like the tan sau and bong sau are designed (via the angles of your arms) to deflect, not primarily with muscle but primarily with the skeleton and tendons as the supporting structure. One of the ways though that a smaller opponent needs to make use of to attack a larger opponent, is to go "all in" with the intent to end the fight ASAP. The longer a fight lasts against even a less skilled, but larger, opponent the lower your chances of winning because you get worn down by the opponent.

 

[Juany118]

Okay this isn't VT, its TWC but this video imo confirms (yes @drop bear I will give credit where credit is due) the "pocket" to a large degree... (picked this one because this is my Sifu's Sifu but know it is a seminar about techniques and not "training" or sparring. I just felt the verbal explanations regarding moving in and "jamming" them up were relevant). It's about "jamming" the other person up so you can end it as quickly as possible, and "jamming" them up means staying in the pocket. To make stuff like this easier in the future maybe we need individual glossaries posted somewhere

 

[Argus]

The other bad thing about chain punching is that if the person blocks that first punch well, then they can pretty much block them ALL well. (It happened to me when I was a beginner and sparred against an experienced Kenpo guy.)

Also, when people go in committed to those chain punches, they don't consider other factors, like the opponent ducking or bobbing and weaving. Then you throw a flurry of punches where either most or all of them hit empty air...because they were so focused on hitting the spot where their opponent's head USED to be.

I think the way to think of it is not as a "technique" (chain punches) but a result of centerline theory and directness as a concept, and expressed by means of our most fundamental technique. Punches in succession happen as a result of the way being open, not as a conscious decision to engage a particular technique.

Example: I often use punches in quick succession (usually just two) against Karate practitioners and inexperienced people who tend to over-commit with their blocks and "push away" my first punch as opposed to just occupying the line. As soon as I feel my first hand moved far enough offline, my rear hand fires in before the opponent can recover. Linked punches happened in succession, but it was my opponent's decision to create the circumstances for them to happen, not mine. Had the opponent remained on center and not pushed past it, there would be no reason to launch the second hand, much less a third.

Chaining punches is one of the most basic ways you can apply centerline theory; learning to replace hands, chase center, and yield to someone who over commits / regain the line. It's a concept to be applied, and a very pragmatic and applicable one; not a technique.

Edit: Woops. Just realized this thread is 10 pages long, and I commented on something from page 1. Oh well. It's still on topic, if not on subject, right?

 

[drop bear]

No because you don't always move goal posts but simply because someone doesn't always do something doesnt by definition mean "never" either. However here you are putting words in my mouth, something else you do (along with taking things out of context.)

I said the punch was "weird", that is different than saying "unique" but even if i had used that word it would not be entirely inaccurate.

The way the punch is applied; elbow down, fist vertical, little body english is what I said, no twisting of the wrist/ elbow as it travels to the target, rotation at the waist, the punch coming "from the heart" along the centerline, relaxing the striking limb immediately on impact. There are other nuances but these are the most obvious. Then you have the idea behind it, "keeping" your weight behind it, unlike others where by leaning into, or the body english already noted above have the practitioner "throwing" their weight behind it.

Also btw I NEVER said "no" shoulder rotation, you need shoulder rotation for a punch to have power. What you don't do is jack back, load, whatever that arm, the way you do with say a strong boxing punch. Part of that of course is due to the elbow position and straight nature of the punch limiting the amout of shoulder movement but I am really trying to figure out how you got specific rotations out of the term "body english."

Other arts have similar punches, but the key word is "similar", which doesn't mean identical. The differences are in all those little details being in the same place. Various arts do share traits with the WC punch but I challenge you to find an art whose punch shares ALL of the traits. If there isn't one then, according the Webster's, that makes it unique, though I prefer the term weird since there are ones that are similar.

Ammy boxers do that style of punching. Which then gets used for MMA under certain conditions.

 

[lansao]

The way it was explained to me is a better term is not so much chain punching but perpetual punching.
When you step in with your initial punch and strike it should be very powerful . And just like a link on a chain where each one is the same as the next, the following punch should be just as powerful as the initial punch and the third pujch should be just as powerful as the second punch.......

A flurry of fast punches with no stopping force behind them is the equivalent of a boxer using nothing but jabs. Yeah they might break your nose and bloody your lip but they're not going to really stop you.

Chain punching is a good tactic to teach beginners because it teaches the strategy of relentless attack while at the same time providing a tactic to do so.
But just like every other martial art in existence, beginners try to do things too fast too soon and end up with flawed, ineffective techniques.

Very well said!

~ Alan, Wing Chun Student