Diu, ma bo. 吊.
You either get it, or you don't.
Such is the way of all Shaolin styles.
Geezer,Warning, The Geezer has some ideas to debate about "WT" stances and steps. Here's Chapter 1:
Some you here have had experience in the WT or WingTsun branch of the Ip Man lineage of Leung Ting. This was the lineage that I trained, and one of it's most distinguishing traits is its peculiar, ....perhaps even extreme take on the WC stance.
Many branches of WC favor a somewhat back-weighted stance when posing one foot forward (as compared to the square-on Yee Gee Kim Ma or "Character Two" / "IRAS" stance). Typically that would be wighting the rear leg 60-70%. In the WT branch, the stance is said to be back weighted 100%. All the bodies "dead" weight is placed on the rear foot and only a light "pressure" is put on the front foot.
The best descriptive analogy heard was that of a man sitting on the edge of a bar stool with one leg extended onto the floor. His dead weight is carried 100% by the stool yet he can put pressure on the floor. Since the stool carries all his weight, he can move or lift his extended leg up off the floor at will, or set it back down with pressure to scoot or adjust the position of his stool. Like this old guy:
Now the real challenge comes when you are told to maintain this weighting when advancing. You are told to extend your front foot, grip the ground and literally drag your whole body forward without unweighting or lifting up the rear, weight-bearing leg at all.
At first this seems an impossible task. Later, making some weighting adjustments most students actually do develop a certain degree of ability to move like this. Some remain clumsy and slow. Others integrate what I call "compensatory techniques" and ultimately come up with something that, while not quite totally back-weighted, is very close to this model yet also functional. In some cases, more than functional. Even explosive. Watch this guy at 2:28-2:30, slow it down to 50% and watch how his rear foot stays on the ground.
So here are a few questions, especially for anybody who spent any time training this in WT.
1. Were you able to make this stance work for you at all?
2. If so, what do you feel were it's advantages and disadvantages.
3. Do you still use this approach, and if so have you made any personal modifications?
Such is the way of all Shaolin styles.
Geezer...One needs to move about naturally and not be restricted to a particular method of moving or balance. Controlled balanced mobility is far more important than adhering to a particular stance, shift, or stepping method.
BTW, we were taught, that in spite of the origin myths deriving Wing Chun from Southern Shaolin, that in many ways, WC was iconoclastic and went against a lot of that tradition. Examples would be the emphasis on simplicity and directness, shedding complex and low percentage techniques, resulting in fewer techniques, fewer forms, and also a preference (especially in the Ip Man lineage) for naming techniques plainly and forgoing traditional poetic terminology.
On the other hand, even the rebellious son who leaves home and denies his family, carries his parents with him in his genes. So it is with WC.
Thought I'd backtrack and include this short video for anybody with no idea of what si taught in the "WT" lineage:
Let's say he's in that stance with the right leg forwards, left leg backwards. And he's got 100% of his weight on his back (left) leg.
If he needs to step to the left or step back, he will need to shift his weight again. Or am I missing something here?
Footwork is to be light and fast move quickly and grind. How can you move to a flank of a boxer,side body if all you do is plod forward?
...If I am wrong you should have no problem cleaning up at the nearest MMA school.
Let's say he's in that stance with the right leg forwards, left leg backwards. And he's got 100% of his weight on his back (left) leg. If he needs to step to the left or step back, he will need to shift his weight again. Or am I missing something here?
For example my WC and everyone's forms are full of grappling and throwing techniques yet most WC has been reduced to a primary focus on striking.There are reasons for this change. The other problem if a primary misunderstanding of Chi Sao.
Could you explain what kind of throwing techniques exist in your WC form?
I'm glad you have pointed this out. You can use WC YJKYM to lock behind your opponent's ankle, and use your shin bone to press on the inside or outside of your opponent's leg to cause a "biting" motion. The lower that you can drop your knee, the strong biting motion that you can perform.the stance opening, is a standing knee lock ...
Very hard question. Much easier to show than to type full explanations.
....One of the most brutal throws is the double tok sau.
...It just keeps going on Chum Kui and the Dummy contain the most information. I will admit our dummy has 8 sections that Yip Man may not have taught. I have never seen the sections in any other dummy form. It is full of leg cutting, sweeps, whipping and driving throws.
....example is when in Chi Sao you arrow step through the other persons legs and hook a leg while your upper body attacks keeps driving through putting your opponent right on the back of their head. Wing Chun throws are not nearly as comprehensive as Shuai jiao. They are a subset that work with WC principals and flow with WC hand techniques.