From Movement to Transmission: Preserving the Art of Wooden Dummy Training

[wckf9230 2]

@Branko Knezevic After visiting your website (theartofmookyanjong.com) and socials, it appears that your focus is selling "secrets" of the 木人樁. Given that the wooden dummy is is just one of the many VT training tools in a single curriculum (simply one part of the whole), in what ways do you promote the development of the entire system?

I concur. I don't think he is presenting anything "new" or "special". It's just an aspect of the overall training methodology. I don't think his wooden dummy eureka moments are 'secret'. Just my .02

 

[Branko Knezevic28 9]

Yes, I use AI to help me refine my English and organize my writing. English is not my first language. The ideas, training method, observations, and experience I am discussing are my own. I have been practicing on the wooden dummy since 1982.

I think the more interesting question is whether the ideas themselves are technically sound. If you disagree with something I wrote, or if you practice on the wooden dummy differently—let’s say by hacking or slamming the dummy—I’m very interested in discussing those differences. That, to me, is a much more interesting conversation about wooden dummy training.

Also, my primary communication tool for presenting my wooden dummy practice is video, where it is quite easy to see what I am actually doing. But this type of practice is fundamentally a hand-brain skill. What you see visually is only part of what is happening. To really understand the movements shown in these videos, visual perception needs to be supported by tactile experience—the feeling of contact, pressure, direction, changing force, and the neurological connection between what the hands feel and how the body responds.

That is why two people can watch exactly the same movement and understand it very differently depending on what they have developed through tactile practice.

 

[Branko Knezevic28 9]

I concur. I don't think he is presenting anything "new" or "special". It's just an aspect of the overall training methodology. I don't think his wooden dummy eureka moments are 'secret'. Just my .02

I actually agree with an important part of what you are saying. I am not presenting any of this as a “secret,” nor am I claiming that I invented something new or special. I learned this method from my Shifu, and I have been practicing on the wooden dummy since 1982.

Where I may differ is in how I understand the role of the dummy. I don’t see it simply as a collection of techniques or as an isolated part of the curriculum. For me, it is a training instrument through which qualities developed elsewhere in Wing Chun can be continuously practiced and integrated—structure, weight transfer, angles, coordination, tactile perception, changes of force, and the synchronization of the feet, body, and hands.

I would say that one of the main differences is the emphasis on wrist connection and continuous contact, rather than repeatedly connecting and disconnecting from the dummy arms. There is also no emphasis on hacking or slamming the dummy. The movement should remain connected and continuous through the transitions.

For me, wooden dummy practice should express broader principles found throughout traditional Chinese martial arts. The movement should not look as though frames are missing from a video—one position, a break, another position, another break. The transition between those positions is part of the training. In many ways, the transition is the training.

So these are not really “wooden dummy eureka moments.” I am trying to explain and visually document a particular method of practice that I learned and have spent many years developing through training. Whether someone considers that method useful is certainly open for technical discussion.

Of course, if someone prefers hacking and slamming into the dummy—usually making contact with the forearms, because repeatedly doing the same thing with the wrists would quickly become uncomfortable—that is a different approach. What I find interesting here is that the difference itself apparently needs to be explained. I would expect someone with substantial wooden dummy experience to recognize immediately the difference between repeatedly striking, disconnecting, and resetting, and maintaining wrist contact while smoothly transferring from one technique into another.

Perhaps that is the real “eureka moment”: the difference is in plain sight and visible to the eye, but seeing movement and understanding what is happening within that movement are not necessarily the same thing.

 

[isshinryuronin13 13]

I actually agree with an important part of what you are saying. I am not presenting any of this as a “secret,” nor am I claiming that I invented something new or special. I learned this method from my Shifu, and I have been practicing on the wooden dummy since 1982.

Where I may differ is in how I understand the role of the dummy. I don’t see it simply as a collection of techniques or as an isolated part of the curriculum. For me, it is a training instrument through which qualities developed elsewhere in Wing Chun can be continuously practiced and integrated—structure, weight transfer, angles, coordination, tactile perception, changes of force, and the synchronization of the feet, body, and hands.

I would say that one of the main differences is the emphasis on wrist connection and continuous contact, rather than repeatedly connecting and disconnecting from the dummy arms. There is also no emphasis on hacking or slamming the dummy. The movement should remain connected and continuous through the transitions.

For me, wooden dummy practice should express broader principles found throughout traditional Chinese martial arts. The movement should not look as though frames are missing from a video—one position, a break, another position, another break. The transition between those positions is part of the training. In many ways, the transition is the training.

So these are not really “wooden dummy eureka moments.” I am trying to explain and visually document a particular method of practice that I learned and have spent many years developing through training. Whether someone considers that method useful is certainly open for technical discussion.

Of course, if someone prefers hacking and slamming into the dummy—usually making contact with the forearms, because repeatedly doing the same thing with the wrists would quickly become uncomfortable—that is a different approach. What I find interesting here is that the difference itself apparently needs to be explained. I would expect someone with substantial wooden dummy experience to recognize immediately the difference between repeatedly striking, disconnecting, and resetting, and maintaining wrist contact while smoothly transferring from one technique into another.

Perhaps that is the real “eureka moment”: the difference is in plain sight and visible to the eye, but seeing movement and understanding what is happening within that movement are not necessarily the same thing.

While there is no doubt such practice on an inanimate object is helpful, there is a limit to what it can accomplish - it does not respond as a living person. So, while it can develop some technical skills it's unable to develop application skills such as timing, tactics and reaction to movement. It seems you are putting too much faith in this activity to give real self-defense capability.

 

[Kung Fu Wang124 154]

While there is no doubt such practice on an inanimate object is helpful, there is a limit to what it can accomplish - it does not respond as a living person. So, while it can develop some technical skills it's unable to develop application skills such as timing, tactics and reaction to movement. It seems you are putting too much faith in this activity to give real self-defense capability.

You can't have a training partner 24/7, but you can have a wooden dummy 24/7. If you can attack so fast that your opponent doesn't have a chance to respond, a wooden dummy can be no different from a live human being. So, what kind of training that can fall into this requirement?

IMO, the following combos are suitable to train on the wooden dummy.

1. Groin kick, leading arm jam, face punch.
2. Catch kick, leading arm jam, face punch.
3. Switch hands.
4. ...

Since you can have your wooden dummy 24/7, you can drill those combos 100,000 times each. When you use those combos to attack, you may attack so fast before your opponent can respond to it. People in the ancient time used this method to develop their fight skill.

I built my wooden dummy from a telephone pole. I added springs so all the 3 arms and leg are movable. I also add robber, fur on the head and chest so I can punch hard on it. So, my experience with the wooden dummy can be a little different.

 

[windwalker099124 154]

Some major purposes of the wooden dummy training you have not addressed yet such as:

1. Side door entering strategy.
2. Front door entering strategy.
3. How to switch between side door and front door.
4. How to block/deflect/catch opponent's waist level kick (by using dummy's middle low arm).
5. How to develop shin bite, reverse shin bite, scoop, scoop kick, sticky lift, foot sweep (by using dummy's leg).

Would like to know your view of 1,2,3,4,5.

Chris Chan a noted wing chun shifu ,,,
practice on the mook jong demo

 

[Kung Fu Wang124 154]

Chris Chan a noted wing chun shifu ,,,
practice on the mook jong demo

By using "switch hands" to switch from

side door -> front door -> the other side door -> front door

is showing in that clip.

Without a wooden dummy, it's impossible to train this by yourself.

 

[Same Trick69 20]

While there is no doubt such practice on an inanimate object is helpful, there is a limit to what it can accomplish - it does not respond as a living person. So, while it can develop some technical skills it's unable to develop application skills such as timing, tactics and reaction to movement. It seems you are putting too much faith in this activity to give real self-defense capability.

Back in the day when Shaolin temple mattered, wooden dummies was the ultimate test of mastery.

Shaolin wooden men hall - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

cn.bing.com

 

[Branko Knezevic28 9]

While there is no doubt such practice on an inanimate object is helpful, there is a limit to what it can accomplish - it does not respond as a living person. So, while it can develop some technical skills it's unable to develop application skills such as timing, tactics and reaction to movement. It seems you are putting too much faith in this activity to give real self-defense capability.

I don't think I have claimed anywhere that wooden dummy training by itself provides complete self-defense capability. Of course an inanimate object cannot reproduce the unpredictability, timing, intention, resistance, or reactions of another human being.

My interest is a different question: what qualities can the wooden dummy develop exceptionally well precisely because it is an inanimate, stable reference?

A living partner constantly changes the information you receive. The dummy does not. That limitation can also be an advantage when the purpose is to isolate and repeatedly develop structure, angles, weight transfer, coordination, force direction, tactile organization, footwork, and continuous transitions.

Once those qualities have been developed through thousands of repetitions and then integrated into partner practice, I think the advantage over someone who has not developed the same level of preparation becomes fairly obvious. The dummy does not provide the application by itself; it develops attributes that you bring into the application.

This is also why I have compared wooden dummy training with the Roman pell. A Roman soldier striking and maneuvering around a wooden post was obviously not under the illusion that the post behaved like an enemy soldier. The value of the pell was precisely that it provided a stable training instrument against which certain physical qualities and movement patterns could be practiced repeatedly. I discussed that comparison in more detail here: The Roman Pell
Those qualities then have to be integrated with partner training. I don't see these as competing forms of practice. They solve different training problems.

 

[Branko Knezevic28 9]

Chris Chan a noted wing chun shifu ,,,
practice on the mook jong demo

Chris Chan’s clip is very close to what I demonstrate. His transfer below the dummy arms is almost identical to the movement in the videos I linked.

The main difference I notice is that he moves his arms well away from the dummy during some transitions, then returns with a strong impact. In the method I learned, the arms remain in contact through the transition, and force is expressed from that existing touch.

Another difference is the point of contact. In this clip, he appears to work primarily through the forearms. My practice emphasizes connection through the wrists, allowing their rotation to guide continuous changes in angle and force.

You can also apply force after withdrawing and returning. Personally, I consider maintaining wrist contact while changing position and expressing force the more demanding skill. That is what I emphasize in my practice.