Decent light sparring vid

[GlennR]

Yet I can hit just as hard with no rear foot go figure or without stepping or shifting or with drawing the arm.

So whats your point? Is Kevins method invalid then?

The way I learned to develop power was by contraction. Yes balance is critical.

And id disagree with contraction, but maybe im not getting your drift here

I have also learned that in fighting you need to be on your toes since all athletic fast or powerful movement begins that way. I do agree with you that the heel is involved in powerful actions since the whole foot is involved in most movement. Think of a sprinter trying to take off on his toes yet his heals hit the ground to drive him forward.

Ok, sure, but the school of thought in some boxing camps is that you plant the front foot on the uppercut, and some on the ball of the foot.
What im saying is that there isnt one "way"

Yes yes yes we push off the ground to move.

Well i guess we do

Newtonian physics and Newtonian cradles? Really?

Sure, if thats how he both understands it and explains it better

[tc101]

So whats your point? Is Kevins method invalid then?

Not at all just that there is more ways than one to skin a cat.

And id disagree with contraction, but maybe im not getting your drift here

Sorry poor word choice I mean I was taught to implode for power where my weight drops down and in rather than pushes outward.

Ok, sure, but the school of thought in some boxing camps is that you plant the front foot on the uppercut, and some on the ball of the foot.
What im saying is that there isnt one "way"

I agree there is not a one right way but a range of possibilities to choose from.

Well i guess we do

Of course.

Sure, if thats how he both understands it and explains it better

It really does not explain it better. I am sure a physicist would cringe. People resort to pseudo scientific language to make their explanations sound more credible when simple straight forward every day language would be so much better for everyone. I think when people resort to Newton and vectors and those sorts of things to explain punching or anything else they are talking out their behinds.

[k gledhill]

Not at all just that there is more ways than one to skin a cat.



Sorry poor word choice I mean I was taught to implode for power where my weight drops down and in rather than pushes outward.



I agree there is not a one right way but a range of possibilities to choose from.



Of course.



It really does not explain it better. I am sure a physicist would cringe. People resort to pseudo scientific language to make their explanations sound more credible when simple straight forward every day language would be so much better for everyone. I think when people resort to Newton and vectors and those sorts of things to explain punching or anything else they are talking out their behinds.

Think of your heel as a handbrake lever on a motorcycle. The brake fluid hose as your body and the fist as the brake pads. If I apply pressure to the heel / brake lever , the brake fluid , under pressure inside the hose, acts like a solid force directly to the brake pads. So I can change the amount of brake force to the pads / hands ,with the amount of pressure I put on the brake lever or the ground. So whatever lever force > will be = to the brake pads < force.
I can use a little force or 100% by driving the heel \ brake lever, to pressure the hose line / body structure , to the fists/ elbows , etc....
A fluid under pressure acts like a solid. Be like water ; )

[Hendrik]

Excellent description .

It is a force flow via a force path. The Chinese called it jin flow and Jin path.

Think of your heel as a handbrake lever on a motorcycle. The brake fluid hose as your body and the fist as the brake pads. If I apply pressure to the heel / brake lever , the brake fluid , under pressure inside the hose, acts like a solid force directly to the brake pads. So I can change the amount of brake force to the pads / hands ,with the amount of pressure I put on the brake lever or the ground. So whatever lever force > will be = to the brake pads < force.
I can use a little force or 100% by driving the heel \ brake lever, to pressure the hose line / body structure , to the fists/ elbows , etc....
A fluid under pressure acts like a solid. Be like water ; )

[tc101]

Think of your heel as a handbrake lever on a motorcycle. The brake fluid hose as your body and the fist as the brake pads. If I apply pressure to the heel / brake lever , the brake fluid , under pressure inside the hose, acts like a solid force directly to the brake pads. So I can change the amount of brake force to the pads / hands ,with the amount of pressure I put on the brake lever or the ground. So whatever lever force > will be = to the brake pads < force.
I can use a little force or 100% by driving the heel \ brake lever, to pressure the hose line / body structure , to the fists/ elbows , etc....
A fluid under pressure acts like a solid. Be like water ; )

I think that is a good description of how I learned as well.

I was also taught just as the elbow is down and in so too is the body so that the body and arm are using the same movement action. That is why we sink down and in with the knees for example.

[k gledhill]

This is why we treat " structure " as a means to channel forces so highly. If I lose an elbow position or a hip twisted out or knees out, it is the same as having a " leak " in the brake hose and while it may apply some force it is also causing a weakness in the defensive ability. As a motorcycle technician it was important to put brake hoses in fluid lines as possible to avoid kinking when bars are turned. So even if angles changed and brakes were used they didn't leak under pressure of a motor-x race ; )

[WC1277]

To Ving Tsun " power punching " with this basic Newtonian law of physics is essential. This is why we keep our rear foot driving int the ground ,skimming the ground in short steps....

Think of your heel as a handbrake lever on a motorcycle. The brake fluid hose as your body and the fist as the brake pads. If I apply pressure to the heel / brake lever , the brake fluid , under pressure inside the hose, acts like a solid force directly to the brake pads. So I can change the amount of brake force to the pads / hands ,with the amount of pressure I put on the brake lever or the ground. So whatever lever force > will be = to the brake pads < force.
I can use a little force or 100% by driving the heel \ brake lever, to pressure the hose line / body structure , to the fists/ elbows , etc....
A fluid under pressure acts like a solid. Be like water ; )

Too bad these "laws" don't work too well with your beloved step-slide. That concept with regards to punching only applies to when the body is at rest and "rooted". Otherwise, you are quite literally a unified object in motion whose center of gravity can be manipulated or rebound "equal in magnitude and opposite in direction" due to the fact that you're actually using the second law to generate power even if the origination started in the third. Explains why so many of you get "tossed" back so often with your method.

When a good WC guy "first" goes in on an opponent, it doesn't really matter too much your "structural method". You are quite literally just following the second law generated by the third. But once contact is made, whether because you landed a punch or they interfered, to maintain forward intent one HAS to switch to a "bracing" footwork strategy for your "principle" to stay true Kevin. Left foot forward, right arm attack, right foot forward, left arm attack. I tried so many different ways to explain this concept! To maintain this principle that YOU described and maintain distance and facing, one MUST switch to "bracing"!

"First law: When viewed in an inertial reference frame, an object either is at rest or moves at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3]

Second law: The acceleration of a body is directly proportional to, and in the same direction as, the net force acting on the body, and inversely proportional to its mass. Thus, F = ma, where F is the net force acting on the object, m is the mass of the object and a is the acceleration of the object.

Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body."

[k gledhill]

Too bad these "laws" don't work too well with your beloved step-slide. That concept with regards to punching only applies to when the body is at rest and "rooted". Otherwise, you are quite literally a unified object in motion whose center of gravity can be manipulated or rebound "equal in magnitude and opposite in direction" due to the fact that you're actually using the second law to generate power even if the origination started in the third. Explains why so many of you get "tossed" back so often with your method.

When a good WC guy "first" goes in on an opponent, it doesn't really matter too much your "structural method". You are quite literally just following the second law generated by the third. But once contact is made, whether because you landed a punch or they interfered, to maintain forward intent one HAS to switch to a "bracing" footwork strategy for your "principle" to stay true Kevin. Left foot forward, right arm attack, right foot forward, left arm attack. I tried so many different ways to explain this concept! To maintain this principle that YOU described and maintain distance and facing, one MUST switch to "bracing"!

"First law: When viewed in an inertial reference frame, an object either is at rest or moves at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3]

Second law: The acceleration of a body is directly proportional to, and in the same direction as, the net force acting on the body, and inversely proportional to its mass. Thus, F = ma, where F is the net force acting on the object, m is the mass of the object and a is the acceleration of the object.

Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body."

They work fine, always have , you're just confused about our approach to fighting.

[WC1277]

They work fine, always have , you're just confused about our approach to fighting.

That's fine if it works for you but can't say I'm confused about you're approach to fighting because I've only seen examples of chi sao. You're going to fight how you're going to fight. Period. I have no qualms with that.

I was just pointing out that you incorrectly attributed that principle to your step slide/shuffle footwork. You described the principle well but was just flat wrong with your attribution of it. Sorry, I'm a stickler when it comes to things like that.

...just some food for thought....ever wonder why a boxer's "power punches" follow the same principle of balance or why a southpaw can be dangerous to fight without experience?

[k gledhill]

That's fine if it works for you but can't say I'm confused about you're approach to fighting because I've only seen examples of chi sao. You're going to fight how you're going to fight. Period. I have no qualms with that.

I was just pointing out that you incorrectly attributed that principle to your step slide/shuffle footwork. You described the principle well but was just flat wrong with your attribution of it. Sorry, I'm a stickler when it comes to things like that.

...just some food for thought....ever wonder why a boxer's "power punches" follow the same principle of balance or why a southpaw can be dangerous to fight without experience?

Your opinion.

[WC1277]

Your opinion.

...backed up by all three laws of motion. Not a cherry picked version to cater to my ideas.

[k gledhill]

...backed up by all three laws of motion. Not a cherry picked version to cater to my ideas.

You're like a kid, battling on the keyboard . Do your parents know youre up this late. ; )

[WC1277]

You're like a kid, battling on keyboard . Do your parents know your up this late. ; )

No, I just love to pick apart the VT's Vatican Pit Bull. I guess I'm a heretic....

Should I purchase an Indulgence?

[tc101]

...backed up by all three laws of motion. Not a cherry picked version to cater to my ideas.

You both have me laughing. Laws of motion, principle of balance, and so forth. It is even funnier when you try to explain boxing.

To clear a couple things up about boxing your principle of balance has nothing to do with power shots. The left hook off the lead is boxings most powerful and dangerous punch which violates your principle. The rear typically hits harder since you typically get more rotation off the rear. Dealing with a southpaw is more difficult even for other southpaws because you will have less experience sparring southpaws and this comes from a southpaw boxer.

When you argue about how your concept or interpretation of some idea is better than the other guys concept or idea it becomes silly. I think it is fine to share how you look at things or what has helped you become better. The whole I have the right idea of how to make wing chun work and anyone with others ideas is simply wrong is laughable since there are other wing chun people without your ideas who can beat you like a rented mule.

[GlennR]

You both have me laughing. Laws of motion, principle of balance, and so forth. It is even funnier when you try to explain boxing.

Well as much as they do go on sometimes there is nothing wrong with bringing up
things such as the ones they mentioned.
Doing is one thing, but knowing WHY things work is handy as well.

To clear a couple things up about boxing your principle of balance has nothing to do with power shots.

Power shots have nothing to do with balance?

The left hook off the lead is boxings most powerful and dangerous punch which violates your principle. The rear typically hits harder since you typically get more rotation off the rear.

Make your mind up, which one is the most powerful?

Dealing with a southpaw is more difficult even for other southpaws because you will have less experience sparring southpaws and this comes from a southpaw boxer.

So it evens it out then.

When you argue about how your concept or interpretation of some idea is better than the other guys concept or idea it becomes silly. I think it is fine to share how you look at things or what has helped you become better. The whole I have the right idea of how to make wing chun work and anyone with others ideas is simply wrong is laughable since there are other wing chun people without your ideas who can beat you like a rented mule.

Look, you make some points, but deriding someone vbecause they explain it in a scientific way is pointless..... discuss if you want but when you break a punch done its all about balance, levers, mass transfer, rotational force and so on.

You cant argue with physics