Food for thought on the "Bai Jong" or "ready position"

[Phobius]

I agree that my view on mobility was at fighting range, not close quarters. If you close the distance prior to using YGKYM I agree the need for more mobility than YGKYM gives may be neglected.

One question that I need to raise though. At such close quarter, you leave your knees vulnerable to kicks. You knee in angle inwards means it would be perfect target to kick and without reacting faster than your opponent does this not cause a high risk of injury? (Given that you have 50-50 dedicated weight in that stance)

Second question is, your feet are further apart from one another than I am used to as well, at least it seemed that way. More than a shoulder width. Is that intentional?

Thanks for showing on video, you do have more mobility from YGKYM than most people I have seen. Means it does have a different meaning to you than to me and a different way of utilizing it.

 

[KPM]

I agree that my view on mobility was at fighting range, not close quarters. If you close the distance prior to using YGKYM I agree the need for more mobility than YGKYM gives may be neglected.

---First, Wing Chun is a close quarter fighting system. Second, I would still maintain that YGKYM isn't any less mobile than say...Bik Ma, Chum Kiu Ma, etc.....regardless of the range.


One question that I need to raise though. At such close quarter, you leave your knees vulnerable to kicks. You knee in angle inwards means it would be perfect target to kick and without reacting faster than your opponent does this not cause a high risk of injury? (Given that you have 50-50 dedicated weight in that stance)

-- Knees are vulnerable to kicks at mid-range. At close range where I believe Wing Chun works well you are more at knee and elbow range, not kicking range. An opponent would have to take a step back away from you to be able to kick your knee. And in that case your knee is vulnerable regardless of how you have it angled. In fact, one could make the argument that angling inward actually protects the knee. If I take a shot with my knee angled inward, that is pretty much going with the natural bend of my knee. So I may be able to absorb the shot without a problem simply by sinking my stance and bending my knee. If I take a shot with my knee in any other position, I risk the chance of my knee being "locked out" or forced into a direction it doesn't normally bend. In both cases I'm more likely to sustain damage to my knee.


Second question is, your feet are further apart from one another than I am used to as well, at least it seemed that way. More than a shoulder width. Is that intentional?

---Yes. I explained before that I don't take that very narrow "pinched" version of YGKYM. My feet are at shoulder width and might end up a little wider as I move around.

 

[Phobius]

---First, Wing Chun is a close quarter fighting system. Second, I would still maintain that YGKYM isn't any less mobile than say...Bik Ma, Chum Kiu Ma, etc.....regardless of the range.

Yes, but you are not without need to close distance whether you are in close quarter or not. Nothing is ever constant, no matter where we are best suited to fight. Reason being that we will not face an opponent that desires close quarter fighting / grapplers prefer clinch. And if you are that close, was it not the discussion that you become vulnerable to a takedown. Reason was according to some video here I think that YGKYM left no leg vulnerable to takedown since both were equally out of range. Going close in a position like that both become within range and requires two movements to get out of range.

This is all just theoretic discussion since my interpretation is different. Not saying YGKYM does not exist, I see it in every transition I do pretty much (truth with a lot of modification of course).

-- Knees are vulnerable to kicks at mid-range. At close range where I believe Wing Chun works well you are more at knee and elbow range, not kicking range. An opponent would have to take a step back away from you to be able to kick your knee.

An opponent is never stuck at mid-range. A wing chun stance for instance allows you to kick the knees or lower already from close quarter when weight is shifted to rear leg.

And in that case your knee is vulnerable regardless of how you have it angled. In fact, one could make the argument that angling inward actually protects the knee. If I take a shot with my knee angled inward, that is pretty much going with the natural bend of my knee.

Also the bend of each knee in YGKYM is towards the center of your opponent, and his kicks in close quarter would most likely be from center. This means a frontal hit on your knee with nowhere for you to absorb or move. If you had no weight on that leg of course the foot itself would move without resistance if kicked. So how is this mitigated or am I missing something?

---Yes. I explained before that I don't take that very narrow "pinched" version of YGKYM. My feet are at shoulder width and might end up a little wider as I move around.

Which is the reason I am curious and asking questions, since you dont do it like I do I cant say you are wrong. It is completely untested by me, and as such interesting to discuss.

 

[KPM]

Yes, but you are not without need to close distance whether you are in close quarter or not. Nothing is ever constant, no matter where we are best suited to fight.

---Yes! Very true! I didn't mean to imply I wouldn't use all the other stances and footwork when appropriate!


. And if you are that close, was it not the discussion that you become vulnerable to a takedown.

---If you are close enough to hit the opponent at all...you are within range of, and therefore vulnerable to a takedown. I'm not much of a grappler, but it seems that people get taken down by a good grappler that suddenly shoots in and gets under them. If you are as close as I have been talking about, the grappler has no room to shoot. He would have to drop straight down to go for your legs, which would be pretty obvious. So it seems to me you may be a bit LESS vulnerable to a takedown when this close, not more vulnerable. Of course, a good grappler would just tie you up and toss you on the ground rather than doing a takedown!


Reason was according to some video here I think that YGKYM left no leg vulnerable to takedown since both were equally out of range. Going close in a position like that both become within range and requires two movements to get out of range.

---But if you are standing with one leg forward and can get out of the way of the takedown in just one movement, then you probably weren't close enough to strike...and therefore you were staying at the wrong range!




Also the bend of each knee in YGKYM is towards the center of your opponent, and his kicks in close quarter would most likely be from center. This means a frontal hit on your knee with nowhere for you to absorb or move.

---Good point! I was visualizing a round kick...like you would encounter from a non-Wing Chun fighter. I never think in terms of fighting another Wing Chun guy. But....when you are in the Bik Ma stance with one leg forward, is not your lead leg also angled inward a bit? Wouldn't it have the same vulnerability?


If you had no weight on that leg of course the foot itself would move without resistance if kicked. So how is this mitigated or am I missing something?

---You're worried about takedowns, but standing with all your weight on one leg?? Somehow that doesn't add up to me. Am I missing something?



Which is the reason I am curious and asking questions, since you dont do it like I do I cant say you are wrong. It is completely untested by me, and as such interesting to discuss.

---If we all did everything the same, we would have little to discuss!

 

[Phobius]

---If you are close enough to hit the opponent at all...you are within range of, and therefore vulnerable to a takedown. I'm not much of a grappler, but it seems that people get taken down by a good grappler that suddenly shoots in and gets under them. If you are as close as I have been talking about, the grappler has no room to shoot. He would have to drop straight down to go for your legs, which would be pretty obvious. So it seems to me you may be a bit LESS vulnerable to a takedown when this close, not more vulnerable. Of course, a good grappler would just tie you up and toss you on the ground rather than doing a takedown!

True, but I was thinking this entire thread was to prove that YGKYM is good because it hinders takedown or at least makes it harder to do for a grappler, against you. If you are saying that one has to be very close (elbow and knee range) before using YGKYM then we have been missunderstanding each other.

Also my view is that YGKYM exist in all stances and nothing is constant due to us always being in motion. So I can not disagree too wildly, only when people call it a stance they think stand as if doing SNT which in my view is good for training purposes and learning body structure but less so when being in motion.

---But if you are standing with one leg forward and can get out of the way of the takedown in just one movement, then you probably weren't close enough to strike...and therefore you were staying at the wrong range!

The range where you can do a straight punch is also a position where a grappler can do a takedown. Of course else might be said about elbow range but I don't really prefer to go into elbow range because of my size. I lose the advantage I have over my opponent in pure height if I do.

---Good point! I was visualizing a round kick...like you would encounter from a non-Wing Chun fighter. I never think in terms of fighting another Wing Chun guy. But....when you are in the Bik Ma stance with one leg forward, is not your lead leg also angled inward a bit? Wouldn't it have the same vulnerability?

Stomps, straight kicks and so on exist in nearly all martial arts styles. Difference with Bik Ma is that my forward leg will move with the opponents kick. We hold no weight on that leg. Of course this gets a lot easier if you have reflexes but leg will move backwards no matter what, it will still leave you bruised and injured but depending on force but you can still continue the fight as the real pain does not come until afterwards when the fight is over and your knee gets really swollen (in case of bad hit).

---You're worried about takedowns, but standing with all your weight on one leg?? Somehow that doesn't add up to me. Am I missing something?

One can never be safe from takedowns, at least not with ease. But by offering up a forward leg without putting weight on it I can easily move back to a sprawl. Not saying there are not other weaknesses in terms of standing with a forward leg and weight on back leg. But then again I am pro constant motion. If I want to stand still I would not chose a close quarter fighting style.

 

[KPM]

True, but I was thinking this entire thread was to prove that YGKYM is good because it hinders takedown or at least makes it harder to do for a grappler, against you. If you are saying that one has to be very close (elbow and knee range) before using YGKYM then we have been missunderstanding each other.

---Fair enough! The thread has drifted back and forth as long threads tend to do. I think we started by pointing out how YGKYM could be less vulnerable to a takedown as explained in the video clip in the OP. Then I expanded on that by saying there were other reasons why I considered the YGKYM more than "just" a training stance. Then we began to talk about mobility and other factors.


Also my view is that YGKYM exist in all stances and nothing is constant due to us always being in motion. So I can not disagree too wildly, only when people call it a stance they think stand as if doing SNT which in my view is good for training purposes and learning body structure but less so when being in motion.

---Agreed. In Pin Sun I think we maybe spend less time trying to drive through an opponent with a Bik Ma step, and more time angling off the line and being more evasive. So this means we spend more time in YGKYM or at least something very close to it than other Wing Chun systems may when moving about. Also, it seems to me that in Ip Man Wing Chun the primary step used is the "chasing step" or "step-slide" or whatever terminology you like. But in Pin Sun the primary step used is really what we call the "Biu Choi" footwork, because it comes from the Biu Choi set. This involves pivoting from the YGKYM, but allowing one foot to advance so that you are moving forward with the pivot. I think a lot of Ip Man lineages don't even learn this until the knife form. But you can see, that if we are using Biu Choi footwork rather than Bik Ma footwork, we are going to be more square to the opponent more often...therefore more time in YGKYM when moving about. Does that make sense?



The range where you can do a straight punch is also a position where a grappler can do a takedown.

---Not really. The range for a straight punch is the length of your extended arm. Perhaps a bit further if you are allowing for a Bik Ma step into the opponent. The distance that a grappler shoots in for a takedown is a bit further out than this.



Stomps, straight kicks and so on exist in nearly all martial arts styles. Difference with Bik Ma is that my forward leg will move with the opponents kick. We hold no weight on that leg.

---Yes, but if your timing isn't quite on the mark, your leg could easily end up hyperextended. I really don't see the leg forward position as any advantage over the YGKYM position as far as vulnerability to kicks. Of course I don't ever stand with all of my weight on one leg...so I haven't played with it in that way.





One can never be safe from takedowns, at least not with ease. But by offering up a forward leg without putting weight on it I can easily move back to a sprawl.

----How are you going to sprawl from a standing on one leg position? Especially if the grappler has ahold of that lead leg?
I'm not a grappler, but from what I have experienced, these guys love to catch someone standing relatively upright with their weight on one leg. The guy that is hard to take down is the guy in a low position with his legs wide.

 

[Phobius]

---Agreed. In Pin Sun I think we maybe spend less time trying to drive through an opponent with a Bik Ma step, and more time angling off the line and being more evasive. So this means we spend more time in YGKYM or at least something very close to it than other Wing Chun systems may when moving about. Also, it seems to me that in Ip Man Wing Chun the primary step used is the "chasing step" or "step-slide" or whatever terminology you like. But in Pin Sun the primary step used is really what we call the "Biu Choi" footwork, because it comes from the Biu Choi set. This involves pivoting from the YGKYM, but allowing one foot to advance so that you are moving forward with the pivot. I think a lot of Ip Man lineages don't even learn this until the knife form. But you can see, that if we are using Biu Choi footwork rather than Bik Ma footwork, we are going to be more square to the opponent more often...therefore more time in YGKYM when moving about. Does that make sense?

Interesting, will consider what this actually means but as for now I say no further comment. Need to grasp the full picture of what you are saying and at work I shouldnt do that.

---Not really. The range for a straight punch is the length of your extended arm. Perhaps a bit further if you are allowing for a Bik Ma step into the opponent. The distance that a grappler shoots in for a takedown is a bit further out than this.

Never said a grappler does not prefer to shoot from proper range, just saying if you are within punching range a grappler will not move out before shooting in. Or you are saying there are no takedowns once you get inside kicking range (extended arm)?

---Yes, but if your timing isn't quite on the mark, your leg could easily end up hyperextended. I really don't see the leg forward position as any advantage over the YGKYM position as far as vulnerability to kicks. Of course I don't ever stand with all of my weight on one leg...so I haven't played with it in that way.

Try it out, or don't depending on what you feel like. But you do not end up with hyperextended knee, not unless you missed to learn something about your own stance. Still we don't follow a strict rule about having all weight on rear leg. It is just what we practise when being kicked on the knees as if reaction is too slow. Part of understanding the kick itself without damaging your opponents knee. (Of course it is not just about being lose, body structure and sense of touch needs to be there, so I can't really explain any details or help you figure it out. Truth be told I am terrible at explaining in words so I never usually try)

To me however movement is a flow of motions. Not locking into a specific stance. Body structure is the key. Which is why I am curious but not really that invested into any stance. I need to train them all. Good or bad, I don't know. It is just what works for me in order to not get stale behaviour.

----How are you going to sprawl from a standing on one leg position? Especially if the grappler has ahold of that lead leg?
I'm not a grappler, but from what I have experienced, these guys love to catch someone standing relatively upright with their weight on one leg. The guy that is hard to take down is the guy in a low position with his legs wide.

As I said, there are no perfect stances to protect against grapplers. There is however an idea that if you only leave your opponent with a single lucrative offer, you will be ready to counter it. Moving into a sprawl is not hard even with limited time frame because it comes naturally and without doubt. Of course body has to be invested in a sprawl, arms as well. You need to have your opponent help you sprawl, without their approval of course. Anything else would just be stupid.