WC hook

[Eru Ilúvatar]

To my knowledge most WC people have a hook/hook like punch in the Biu tze form. I would like to ask those people how do they apply the hook. I would be greateful for any application descriptons/situations in Chi sao that you found it useful. Also, in your opinion, what are some situations in which the hook punch would be the most WC response to the situation?

Thanks in advance!

 

[mook jong man]

Well there is the obvious one where you seize their arm and pivot , dragging them into the hook punch . Also if they try to attack you with a circular punch to the head , you can defend your self with one arm by doing a Bong Sau on the inside of their arm and changing to a hook punch thus deflecting and striking through at the same time .

I think we also used to do one against a straight punch where you Pak Sau , step to the side and hook punch them in the lower side of the body , then that hand comes up grabs their arm and latches them into a Wing Chun side kick .

 

[mook jong man]

Oh I forgot in Chi Sau when you have some one bullishly pressing forward on you , you can pivot them off to the side and just when they are falling to the side you can pivot back into them with your hook punch .

So on one side you will hook punching from your Fook Sau and if you pivot them the other way you will be hook punching from a reverse Tan Sau or Bong Sau position .

In Chi Sau you can also use the Chum Kiu hook punch , instead of dropping your Fook Sau down , trapping both their hands and bringing up your Tan Sau to punch over the top. Leave the bottom hand down and do a hook punch under the ribs or jaw .

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Thanks Mook! I'll try the one with the guy pushing at you as soon as I can. I would like to ask you to explain the obvious one a bit better Do you seize his right punch with your right hand and while pivoting to the right you hook him with the left(thats what you probably ment, huh?), or do you seize his right punch with your left hand and I guess you could guide it with a Lan motion underneath your right armpit and hook him with the left? The last one sounds a bit weird when I think about it though... Would have to try it out to see if it would work...

But still the question remains; why not just use a straight punch? Could anyone tell me a situation where a straight punch wouldn't actualy be the shortest distance between 2 point, the most economical way to deal with the situation etc. If I understand your techniques ok, it seems you could do all of them with a straight punch.

And another thing. Do you think the hook is stronger? I don't realy know plus I was thought little about it and used it in WC even less... But it seems it's a longer motion thus it achieves bigger acceleration and thus delivers a bigger force. You also do it with a turn so thats up to the speed/acceleration. But on the other hand you can't use structure in it as you can in a straight punch with the elbow down.

Please share thoughts.

 

[geezer]

...in your opinion, what are some situations in which the hook punch would be the most WC response to the situation?

Thanks in advance!

In our system, the hook punch is not the preferred response (as it might be in boxing, for example). Instead, it is reserved for particular situations where straight, centerline techniques will not work, or where the hook actually becomes the most efficient technique for the situation. For example if an opponent crouches and raises their guard, boxing-style to cover up with their forearms, your centerline path is closed off. Instead you can grab their arms and turn, sweeping their guard aside as you deliver the hook to their ear or jaw. Mook's first two examples, the arm-grapple to hook, and second, countering a high hook with an inside-gate bong-sau which is then converted to a countering hook are also both standard applications in the WT I learned. The simplest application of all is when your opponent uses pak sau or otherwise knocks your arm downward and aside with excessive, overcommited force. As your arm is already knocked off center, you just follow the energy around and upward, in an arc back onto center with a hook punch to the head, borrowing your opponent's force and hitting him as you recover your position.


Actually, there are quite a few ways to use hooks in WT, but again, they typically come up when centerline is closed off or when your arm or body is not in the usual center to center orientation. It is because their use is more specialized or situational, that hooks are typically trained later, usually along with Biu Tze applications.

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Would you say it would be better to train hooks for situations like that or a sidestep straight punch? One thing is that if the boxer closes his centerline with his hands and you go round he could decide to go forward anytime. He could probably decide to screw you badly and go into a covering pak and straight punch while stepping forward when you do a hook. Thats the only problem I have with hooks realy. Oh ok I read you say you grab his arm and do a hook so that evens the odds a bit but do you see what I'm saying? Why not just sidestep and lap punch, pak punch, whatever punch or just punch straight?

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Instead you can grab their arms and turn, sweeping their guard aside as you deliver the hook to their ear or jaw.

P.S. I just saw that you say you sweap the boxers guard aside. How were you thought to do that? Do you use both hands? And I'm confused about what kind of guard are we talking now; the one where the guy covers up with his fists somwhere between his temples and forehead and forearms vertical? If you have time can you please explain that technique?

 

[geezer]

P.S. I just saw that you say you sweap the boxers guard aside. How were you thought to do that? Do you use both hands? And I'm confused about what kind of guard are we talking now; the one where the guy covers up with his fists somwhere between his temples and forehead and forearms vertical? If you have time can you please explain that technique?

Yes, that's it exactly. When the guy covers like that and evades to the side, slipping your punch, you may convert the punch into a grapple, latching onto his forearm and turn or pivot. With the power of your stance-turning, you sweep his guard downward and across as your body simultaneously moves off-line to the opposite side while delivering the hook. You've got to use the grapple, turn and hook as one motion (all on one-beat) if you don't want the guy to roll into a body shot or uppercut. The grab has to be a sharp, snappy, jerk that unbalances your opponent as well as creating an opening.

BTW in your previous post you asked if it would be better to side-step and use a straight punch. Now I can't speak for other WT guys who have better technique. But my personal answer is, yes, I always prefer the more the more basic approach. I believe Leung Ting once said something to the effect that the advanced techniques are there for beating other Wing Tsun/Chun practitioners. For real fights (presumably against other styles of fighting) keep it simple!

 

[mook jong man]

Thanks Mook! I'll try the one with the guy pushing at you as soon as I can. I would like to ask you to explain the obvious one a bit better Do you seize his right punch with your right hand and while pivoting to the right you hook him with the left(thats what you probably ment, huh?), or do you seize his right punch with your left hand and I guess you could guide it with a Lan motion underneath your right armpit and hook him with the left? The last one sounds a bit weird when I think about it though... Would have to try it out to see if it would work...

But still the question remains; why not just use a straight punch? Could anyone tell me a situation where a straight punch wouldn't actualy be the shortest distance between 2 point, the most economical way to deal with the situation etc. If I understand your techniques ok, it seems you could do all of them with a straight punch.

And another thing. Do you think the hook is stronger? I don't realy know plus I was thought little about it and used it in WC even less... But it seems it's a longer motion thus it achieves bigger acceleration and thus delivers a bigger force. You also do it with a turn so thats up to the speed/acceleration. But on the other hand you can't use structure in it as you can in a straight punch with the elbow down.

Please share thoughts.

About the first one I said , its going back a long way when I got taught that one and I seriously cant remember if it was off a punch or when you can't break through some ones guard .

What i do remember though is that you are on their blind side and you sieze their single arm with both your arms and then you do a sharp pivot which pulls them into your hook punch to the jaw or throat or let their throat run into your forearm.

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Yes, that's it exactly. When the guy covers like that and evades to the side, slipping your punch, you may convert the punch into a grapple, latching onto his forearm and turn or pivot. With the power of your stance-turning, you sweep his guard downward and across as your body simultaneously moves off-line to the opposite side while delivering the hook. You've got to use the grapple, turn and hook as one motion (all on one-beat) if you don't want the guy to roll into a body shot or uppercut. The grab has to be a sharp, snappy, jerk that unbalances your opponent as well as creating an opening.

I'm not sure about that one. Would have to try it out. That type of guard is pretty tight tho. I don't know you can just pull it of him. And the leverage is on his side becouse he has a shorter handle. But a jerky snappy motion would probably enough to get an opening.

BTW in your previous post you asked if it would be better to side-step and use a straight punch. Now I can't speak for other WT guys who have better technique. But my personal answer is, yes, I always prefer the more the more basic approach.

Well thats how I see things too basicly.

I believe Leung Ting once said something to the effect that the advanced techniques are there for beating other Wing Tsun/Chun practitioners. For real fights (presumably against other styles of fighting) keep it simple!

Well the thing is that I understand other "advanced" techniques. There is a situation where the elbow is the most suitible response to the situation. Same with huen bo, the ducking motion and the po pai motions from the Biu Tze. But the thing is, I can't see that situation for the hook. The funny thing is that my instructor was thought a certein way in that part of the Biu tze that my instructor later put the hook in. In the original (from my sigung) version there was no hooks but a diffrent response becouse my sigung didn't believe WC has a hook. And I'm starting to lean towards that way of thinking more and more. I also like the thing my sigung did(my instructor showed me both; allthough he considered the sigungs version inferior). The thing is, if there is a hook in WC, it's the only strike(I see right now) in WC that doesnt use your structure(ok, one can say that the faak sao strike doesn't use the full body structure either). The mechanics of the hook is such that from the hit point and to the heel there is no linked structure. It hits your shoulder or in the best case your hip from where the hook usualy draws its power. Now if the hook is there just to put tools in the box(so to speak) then it's aslo the only motion in WC I see that is not there to be the best solution to a specific situation. I would love to discus this and ofcourse I may be missing something. I'm not saying that I wouldn't use it in a street fight or if the opportunity arose but my question is: is the hook true to the WC core principals?

 

[geezer]

I'm not sure about that one. Would have to try it out. That type of guard is pretty tight tho. I don't know you can just pull it of him. And the leverage is on his side becouse he has a shorter handle. But a jerky snappy motion would probably enough to get an opening.

Right, and don't forget that you are adding the power of your stance-pivot. Remember, even if your opponent is too solid to be moved, you yield and "move yourself" with the technique, getting the angle you need. It's like when you pak sau a heavy tree branch. With the force of the pak sau, either the branch moves to one side, or you move to the other. In either case, you are no longer in front of the branch, right? The same principle applies here.

In the original (from my sigung) version there was no hooks but a diffrent response becouse my sigung didn't believe WC has a hook... my question is: is the hook true to the WC core principals?

If you go way back in time, say to the early 19th Century, Wing Chun/Tsun emerged from other Southern Chinese "short bridge" systems that had a great many techniques and forms. The beauty of Wing Chun/Tsun is it's comparative simplicity. Gradually forms and techniques were refined and simplified to the essential elements we have today. In this sense, I feel that the hook punch, as well as a host of other techniques not included in the system today, were doubtless originally part of Wing Chun/Tsun. Whether the hook should remain in the system is ultimately a matter of your personal perspective and how narrow or broad your vision of Wing Chun is.

My outlook is not nearly so broad as the JKD guys, nor so narrow as certain ultra-purists. I guess I take a moderate stance. I like to stay with the traditional art, but adapted for our time. And from my perspective, the hook has a very legitimate role in the style. In some regards it's not unlike a withdrawing fak sau. In other aspects it uses turning energy like the turning pie-jarn, or "hacking elbows" in Chum Kiu form. And when applied in the appropriate situation, the hook is as efficient and direct as any other WC/WT technique. I think it's important to remember that our theory is a means to an end... namely efficacy. To get results. Theory should never be an end in itself!

 

[Yoshiyahu]

I feel I am WC purist. I believe the Hook and upper cut is natural part of WC.


Recently I be working on Tan sau followed with hook.

An also a hand grab pulling opponent outward while applying the hook at the same time.


I have also in the past utlize the same techniques as mook...


Check this video out?

Right, and don't forget that you are adding the power of your stance-pivot. Remember, even if your opponent is too solid to be moved, you yield and "move yourself" with the technique, getting the angle you need. It's like when you pak sau a heavy tree branch. With the force of the pak sau, either the branch moves to one side, or you move to the other. In either case, you are no longer in front of the branch, right? The same principle applies here.



If you go way back in time, say to the early 19th Century, Wing Chun/Tsun emerged from other Southern Chinese "short bridge" systems that had a great many techniques and forms. The beauty of Wing Chun/Tsun is it's comparative simplicity. Gradually forms and techniques were refined and simplified to the essential elements we have today. In this sense, I feel that the hook punch, as well as a host of other techniques not included in the system today, were doubtless originally part of Wing Chun/Tsun. Whether the hook should remain in the system is ultimately a matter of your personal perspective and how narrow or broad your vision of Wing Chun is.

My outlook is not nearly so broad as the JKD guys, nor so narrow as certain ultra-purists. I guess I take a moderate stance. I like to stay with the traditional art, but adapted for our time. And from my perspective, the hook has a very legitimate role in the style. In some regards it's not unlike a withdrawing fak sau. In other aspects it uses turning energy like the turning pie-jarn, or "hacking elbows" in Chum Kiu form. And when applied in the appropriate situation, the hook is as efficient and direct as any other WC/WT technique. I think it's important to remember that our theory is a means to an end... namely efficacy. To get results. Theory should never be an end in itself!

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Cool video... What about instead of the hook in that video the guy would do a straight punch? Would it be more/less powerful? What are the pros of the hook and the cons of the punch lol Can you find any hypothetical situation where the hook would be more effective in the WC sense than a straight punch?

 

[geezer]

What are the pros of the hook and the cons of the punch... Can you find any hypothetical situation where the hook would be more effective in the WC sense than a straight punch?

Damn...I can't get video on this computer. I'll have to wait till I get home.
Anyway, regarding advantages of a hook over a straight punch, I see three:

1. In the right situation, a hook will go around an obstacle such as a blocking arm, shoulder, etc. that would make a straight shot ineffective.

2. In the right situation, a hook uses whipping force generated by the whole body via the stance-pivot, and makes for a very powerful strike (akin to the force generated in the pie-jarn or hacking elbow strikes in Chum Kiu mentioned before).

3. In the right situation, as for example after grappling your opponent's arm and pulling him across and in front of you (think of the Biu Tze double hand grapple and turn) the hook is the shortest path to strike your opponent. In order to hit him with a straight punch, you would have to withdraw your hand first. And that would be inefficient... ie a poorer choice by WT/WC standards!

But, as you'll note, the hook is only applied in those specific situations where it is the most efficient solution.

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Thanks Geezer! This is what I was looking for!

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Right, and don't forget that you are adding the power of your stance-pivot. Remember, even if your opponent is too solid to be moved, you yield and "move yourself" with the technique, getting the angle you need. It's like when you pak sau a heavy tree branch. With the force of the pak sau, either the branch moves to one side, or you move to the other. In either case, you are no longer in front of the branch, right? The same principle applies here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eru Ilúvatar
In the original (from my sigung) version there was no hooks but a diffrent response becouse my sigung didn't believe WC has a hook... my question is: is the hook true to the WC core principals?

If you go way back in time, say to the early 19th Century, Wing Chun/Tsun emerged from other Southern Chinese "short bridge" systems that had a great many techniques and forms. The beauty of Wing Chun/Tsun is it's comparative simplicity. Gradually forms and techniques were refined and simplified to the essential elements we have today. In this sense, I feel that the hook punch, as well as a host of other techniques not included in the system today, were doubtless originally part of Wing Chun/Tsun. Whether the hook should remain in the system is ultimately a matter of your personal perspective and how narrow or broad your vision of Wing Chun is.

My outlook is not nearly so broad as the JKD guys, nor so narrow as certain ultra-purists. I guess I take a moderate stance. I like to stay with the traditional art, but adapted for our time. And from my perspective, the hook has a very legitimate role in the style. In some regards it's not unlike a withdrawing fak sau. In other aspects it uses turning energy like the turning pie-jarn, or "hacking elbows" in Chum Kiu form. And when applied in the appropriate situation, the hook is as efficient and direct as any other WC/WT technique. I think it's important to remember that our theory is a means to an end... namely efficacy. To get results. Theory should never be an end in itself!

Missed that post I agree. Thanks, great post!

 

[Yoshiyahu]

Thats a good question. I use far more straight punches than hooks. But If I do use a hook or circle strikes Its because the person has a good defense against straight punches. Usually people are trained to block certain types of strikes better than others. But it depends on my posistioning and angle. Also the person defenses. But thats me. I mostly use straight punches. But I believe its beneficial to train many things because you never know what you may need to use. I believe Hooks are apart of WC as shown in Bil Gee and upper cuts as shown in Chum Kiu!

Wing Chun has principals but sometimes you may have to go outside the principals. Like WC doesn't have high kicks. But I think you should also train high kicks. Because this way your WC brothers can practice blocking high kicks. An when you spar you can through other types of attacks outside of just WC. So you will be more well rounded. My Sihing studied Karate before WC. So he has very good high kicks with alot power. But he uses low kicks in a fight. But since he practices the high kicks and strechtes daily if the opportunity present itself comes you may have to use high kicks. To end an confrontation?

But its great though. I think in my small feebel opinion that hook is technique that needs to practice regularly along with the upper cut. So that way you have more weapons in your arsenal. I wouldn't say its more effective or less effective! I think its equal useful technique?

Cool video... What about instead of the hook in that video the guy would do a straight punch? Would it be more/less powerful? What are the pros of the hook and the cons of the punch lol Can you find any hypothetical situation where the hook would be more effective in the WC sense than a straight punch?

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Thats a good question. I use far more straight punches than hooks. But If I do use a hook or circle strikes Its because the person has a good defense against straight punches. Usually people are trained to block certain types of strikes better than others.

I like that answer!

Hooks are apart of WC as shown in Bil Gee and upper cuts as shown in Chum Kiu!

Yea but the point I wanted to make was that becouse of the Chum Kiu elbow-in you still exploit the whole use of your structure-in the hook you don't. But as Geezer mentioned hook drives its power from a lot of other things so it makes it as much/or even more powerful than the straigh punch.

Wing Chun has principals but sometimes you may have to go outside the principals. Like WC doesn't have high kicks. But I think you should also train high kicks. Because this way your WC brothers can practice blocking high kicks. An when you spar you can through other types of attacks outside of just WC. So you will be more well rounded. My Sihing studied Karate before WC. So he has very good high kicks with alot power. But he uses low kicks in a fight. But since he practices the high kicks and strechtes daily if the opportunity present itself comes you may have to use high kicks. To end an confrontation?

Look, I'm starting to think more and more that we look at the things the same... For clarification read my answer to you on the Wing Chun + Spear thread.

I think its equal useful technique?

Yes! Exactly! In the end all techniques are useful/effective if they land on the target and put you in a stronger position than a moment before, wouldn't you say?

 

[Yoshiyahu]

I think we are on same mental wave length. As for applications of hook there are numerous. Not mention the fact you can use the hook motion for other things than a punch.


But if you look at the hook your structure is still being used but in different way. In Bil Gee you use the weight of your foe along with your waist power to apply the hook. But when the hook comes your body is behind it. Due to power in the waist and rotation of axis that is hips along with the shoulders torquing so to speak. So once your entire body has turn an your stance shifts or rotatates than your body power is behind the punch...

Not like how a boxer would generate power from a hook but different. The best thing to do is break it down...practice it over and over again. An build it up.

But I love your statements excellent.

Yes! Exactly! In the end all techniques are useful/effective if they land on the target and put you in a stronger position than a moment before, wouldn't you say?

i totally agree!

I like that answer!



Yea but the point I wanted to make was that becouse of the Chum Kiu elbow-in you still exploit the whole use of your structure-in the hook you don't. But as Geezer mentioned hook drives its power from a lot of other things so it makes it as much/or even more powerful than the straigh punch.



Look, I'm starting to think more and more that we look at the things the same... For clarification read my answer to you on the Wing Chun + Spear thread.



Yes! Exactly! In the end all techniques are useful/effective if they land on the target and put you in a stronger position than a moment before, wouldn't you say?

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

Could you give me some examples? An application or two would be great!