Even if the range presented itself, can "trapping" techniques even be pulled off, especially against an opponent that tends to pull their arms back, pull back with strength and tries to create space and distance....
the argument then goes on to say, well, if trapping range/distance rarely occurs in a fight, then why does wing chun (or even other kung fu styles) emphasize so much of that training in the school?
Well guess what? there's a lot of truth to this argument. (Scary isn't it?)
I think it's easy to get caught up in chi-sao/trapping drills and distance, and end up forgetting that all it comes down to is whether you can punch/hit/kick or not.
that said, i would see wing chun, (as i'm taught) as a basis or foundation for being able to punch or kick or hit your opponent. Not "trap." I see chi-sao, not necessarily as a tool to see what kind of cool trapping techniques are available, but more as an exercise to increase structural resilience, fine tune the tactile reflexes, simply for the purpose of punching/hitting the opponent.
It's easy to get caught up in this, and easy to confuse chi-sao as a measure of fighting effectiveness or even punching ability.
But chi-sao and punching your opponent are two different things
Much like jump rope and hitting the heavy bag for the boxer are two different things, but both essential to the training curriculum.
your chi-sao may be good, but it doesn't mean you can hit the other guy. Wing chun is not meant for trapping range. It's meant to knock out the opponent. The premise that wing chun is for trapping doesn't/shouldn't hold.
Until then.
No comments:
Post a Comment