Centerline Theory is Fake and Made Up
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- A video for nerds in which I examine why centerline theory does not apply to hand-to-hand fighting by comparing it with longsword fighting.
(Mostly) Edited by Alexander Thill! His page: www.fiverr.com...
Thanks to Metrolina Martial Arts for letting me film in their gym! Their channel: / @metrolinamartialarts
My Twitter: / armchairviolenc
Still getting a lot of comments saying, "Um, aCtUaLlY, centerline means this other thing!"
Every style, lineage, and practitioner of wing chun and jkd define centerline differently. Sometimes WILDLY differently. The definition in the video is the most common definition I have encountered.
I'm not wrong, you were just taught different terminology. That's why I defined centerline at the beginning of the video! So we would all be on the same page.
Indeed you did, but you still have a click bait title which raises the questions whether that is the ONLY centerline theory you are aware of. So I personally just wanted to inform you further. You know sharing knowledge as you do in your videos, which are very well crafted and thought through
Your demonstration of Wing Chun just shows you have absolutely no knowledge of what Wing Chun and center line are, all lineages included.
No that's just kung fu people. Point out something about kung fu is bad and they try to change the definition of that thing.
@@teabrick7384 I agree with you, many things are worthless in Kung Fu. And on all honest traditional wing Chun does not work. BUT if you take the material it gives you and the mentality of the shortest distance, balance etc. It can become very useful. To my student I say this, take Wing Chun apply it with practical movements but same principles and you are good. If you then add basic grappling skills from a trained expert you then have a good self defence
If you then learn *
The closest thing to a practical application of this idea is probably in some grappling concepts. Fighting for... and capitalizing on head position is one. In a grappling stance, keeping your elbows tucked in and hands out in front of them is probably the closest to the idea of the longsword. The positioning of your arms helps you both actively and passively defend inside position and handfight.
HEMA guy here. Yeah, pretty on point generally with the centerline stuff for longsword though the weapon art that has the greatest focus on holding the center (IMO) is actually the Spanish style Rapier aka 'La Verdadera Destreza.' If fact most treatises from this style literally begin with an extended geometry lesson and it's application to sword and body movements.
Yeah, actually grip fighting from closed guard top looks a lot like wing chun. I want to clean up the center line and pin the shoulders to my escape. While the main target is my lapel.
If you are not attached together the whole thing fals apart.
16 years of kendo taught me the centerline is really damn important. 5 muay thai classes taught me this doesn't work without a sword
That's fair! The centerline is, ironically, probably more important in grappling than striking. But grappling uses the concept of "inside control" instead.
Good point, but i really would like to find a (good) application for it on striking...
I see your well reasoned, logical argument and raise you a "nuh uh!"
*sprints out of room swirling hands across head in a befuddling Keysi system tactical whirlwind of impenetrable three dimensional Dark Knight defensive gesturing
dont fear a man who did one elbow once fear the man that did 10000 elbow variations like a windmill
🤣 This is art!
Hey, if you ever had a bee come at your face, Keysi works really well! (also applicable against bats in a cave......wait a minute!!!)
Any chance we can divide the comments into two groups?
1) Commenters that spar
2) Commenters that don’t spar but know everything
Have any of the wing chun nerds said “Chinese butterfly swords, not English long swords!” yet?
If you want to witness one of the most pedantic nerdy arguments ever (next to who would win, Superman bs the Hulk) get a wing chun nerd and a Bagua Zhang nerd in the same room. They’ll never spar with each other, but they’ll argue all day about wing chun center line theory vs Bagua off-center theory.
As a former wing chun nerd I actually thought: "this would apply to the butterfly swords/knives as well."
I assume that this is where the idea comes from.
They have 100% brought up butterfly swords. But they're dumb weapons, so I ignored them 😆. Centerline is far more applicable to longswords than butterfly sword!
What's Bagua's off-center theory? Just the concept of getting OFF the centerline?
@@ArmchairViolence Yep, Bagua is pretty much a couple of simple footwork and hand fighting patterns to get off the centerline and flank the other guy.
Bagua: 1
Wing Chun: 0
…Bagua all day! 😂
This lends evidence to a theory that I have had for a while now that most of wing chun's unarmed fighting is actually training drill for armed combat whose context has been forgotten. It just looks so similar to may of the warm up drill we do in HEMA and even the theory seems to match that of armed fighting.
People often forget the double knife and staff aspects of wing chun
All pre modern kung fu was based on melee weapons. You only fight with your hands when you're unarmed and the only position worse than being unarmed in armed combat is being grounded.
As a long time WC practitioner in my youth I found this {WC evolving from weapons}theory ridiculous until recently, now it seems fully plausible. I think that hand to hand fighting was so localized and rudimentary that it only took a light change/advancement in theory for a 'new' style to be successful. This change in theory was WC's utilization of weapons and fencing theory applied to fighting. Look how quickly a single move {legs kicks?} in the UFC can change the meta and invalidate older skillsets. Just as new western styles have emerged {head movement!}and invalidated the majority of WC...sadly.
It is. Did you watch ip man? When they fought with those big double knives. Yea that's what most of that is about . All of this we see is just garbage none of it comes from anyone who has fought
This is also applicable to Xing Yi which focuses its movement down the center as it evolved from spear training techniques.
When I did chinese martial arts, my instructor de-mystified the center-line theory a bit by saying "the center" actually just refers to the opponent's spine, and that you have to disrupt his balance first in order to have a shot at making any of the techniques work. Kinda similar to making Judo throws work against a resisting opponent. I think wing chun should be looked at as more of a grappling art than a striking one. If you just stand still, stiff as a board and try to slap your opponents punches out of the way, it's not gonna end well.
Yeah that's pretty much how I understood it too...just throw your opponent off balance however way you can. Basically he's off balance and you're not.
I view it as hand wrestling art.
One must overcome hand obstruction in order to touch target.
Totally agree. I learned Chinese mainland Wing Chun and my Sifu told me that centerline theory was flat wrong. He said instead to move offline to the outside, as a general rule. Kind of like triangle footwork in Kali. Centerline's only use was as a target to drive traps into since it contained center of mass and force driven into it would be most difficult to deal with. So step off line, drive opponent's guard into his center line in an aggressive attack which may involve striking with both arms at the same time with, one clearing his guard and the other attacking the target. It was all about how to attack opponent's center of mass while also attacking other targets simultaneously.
But that's not what Wing Chun does or tries to do. We deflect the incoming blow by parrying it (making contact with it and deflecting it) as we turn "in stance" on our heels (with bent knees, and "sitting" down and over the rear leg, which moves you offline of the attack) creating/opening up a "new centreline" while simultaneously striking with the other hand. I think the guy in the video needs to take a few lessons in Wing Chun before he rights it off. He might just learn something 🤔
@@savoirfaire6181 you can also get the same effect and stepping offline with turning if done properly. Maybe when you haven't got time to step
"Get your head off line!" is the extent of my motherline usage. lol
Yeah, get off the centre line once someone attacks is the version I learnt from multiple traditional and modern martial arts
Okay so, my instructor teaches wing chun as part of his system, and he has never spoken about center line as being a static central guard. He's always spoken about controlling it as in keeping yours pointed towards your opponent while keeping off of theirs. Or in short, keep them in front of you without being in front of them.
As for protecting the centre line, you control it with your guard. So if you have your hands either side of your face, your center line is open but that means you dictate what options are available to your opponent, in this case strikes through the middle. If your guard is more centered (not exactly center though), then your opponent is more likely to go for outside shots as straights are easier for you to guard against.
So being aware of your center line, and how your actions can be exploited, means you are better able to control a fight.
This whole strike from the centre thing needs to stop too. You may be striking for the center (face, solar plexus etc), but your strikes are not coming from the centre. It's as bad as people thinking the one inch punch is a technique (it's not, it's a kinetic chain exercise) or that piston punches are devastating (they're not, they are weak but they are fast for the sake of overwhelming for a moment and clearing hands).
As my teacher explained. Bruce and ip developed their theory based around their bodies... The had smaller frames than us, Bruce adapted this by putting on muscle while maintaining an insane regimen to maintain the power in his techniques. We overseas are naturally much bigger usually, wider... So we have to adapt the centerline theory with timing and power usually. Mike Tyson is a prime example of this. Ali as well as with Mike you could say he's swinging his centerline around where as Ali has his on a tilt. Ultimately though the core is the basis of the centerline in my op.... It's easier for a bigger person to focus on how to adapt their core movement vs trying to operate from centerline. Again, Tyson is a prime example. To sing his body around like that with his muscle mass would take a serious amount of core training just so he doesn't hurt himself by throwing his punches. Also he's too big to apply centerline as Bruce Lee did.
All of that is just my speculation
What's a piston punch?
Go full contact against a thai boxer and see if it works, maybe you can
@@OverSooll you'd have to be kyokushin conditioned and ready to face punch like a boxer.
UR TERMINOLOGY IS WRONG!!! My tactical chi eye-gouging kata has won all of my 7,000 street fights!!!
The fact that you made a new account just for this comment makes me very happy.
Only one a day for less than 20 years?
Amateur.
Oh no, I'm getting my own jokes quoted back to me! 🤣
Your girlfriend is a saint for playing swords with you on youtube
Isn't she like a fencing or hema efficianado?
@@corymoore8562 There's a video that says she was on a collegiate fencing team.
Damn im not caught up on the armchair lore
“Punches come ur feet 👣 not ur shoulders.”~Jack Dempsey
Depend on person sty in Tyson Case Peekaboo use your Whole Body not just feets so it Depend on Sty alone.
But the fist does come form shoulders
@@sangvi2849 nope, from the elbow! Power come from the feet.
@@chopsueykungfu nope, from the wrist
Bjj girl here
The centaur line control is actually a grappling thing
They move linearly to close the distance faster, u get in close and get your hands on the inside for collar ties and wrist fighting
That’s what wing chung actually is, it’s what wrestlers call handfighting!
If your opponent throws hooks and your fast enough (and very importantly close enough!), u can obtain inside elbow control which is crazy powerful
It allows u to push them and the only way for them to disengage gives u a free strike
You kinda mention it earlier in the video: using the centerline approach isn't just getting off of it, but reestablishing it. You use lateral movement, for example a v step, to get off the opponent's centerline and put him in front of yours during. That concept can be found in pretty much all combat sports:
Cut an angle in (kick-)boxing and hit with a straight punch, duck under in wrestling and take the back, side step in fencing and thrust, etc.
It boils down to: don't stand in front of your opponent and try to face a side of him, that he can't defend.
So technically Wing Tsun is correct. The method is just taught in an often unpractical way. The armed techniques make a little more sense though. The centerline guard you showed, is kinda neat when dual wielding short swords. You can establish range, constantly threat thrusts and parry most incoming blows with minimal movement.
WC teaches centre line because the first stance is square as opposed to other stances that are left leading. In left leading you can cover your front with pivoting, where WC you need to cover your centre line because it’s fully exposed. That being said it is only taught in the first form for beginners so it’s like saying boxing jabs are wrong because it doesn’t work against advanced techniques. The jab is just the first thing you learn not what the martial art is about and that goes the same for WC centre line theory.
You are 100% wrong. My win chung sensei who teaches center teseract theory totally teaches you how to defend yourself from infinite center planes while attacking the groins of your eyes and the eye of your groin.
Your wing teacher is japanese?
My Wing Chun Sifu told me that if I train it for 20 years, I will become impervious against bullets. I wish I was kidding.
i use a long guard for boxing which is controlling the centre line via "defensive traffic" and works very well against straight shots. It forces opponents to use slower and more easily detected hook shots.
I came to the realization in a longer path. Day 1 of Pekiti Tirsia Kali, " If you stay on centerline you are going to get hit/cut. "
The footwork reflected that and took my striking to a new level.
The next time I saw it emphasized to the same extent, was when people started to teach me how to box. The way my friends brother showed me to box, the centerline is fucking precious. Everything is a battle of positioning where you don't even wanna give up your shoulder line. The closest to pekiti tirsia footwork I've seen in empty hands, is boxing footwork used by guys like Willy Pep, or Tyson's D'Amato shifts. Dominick Cruz's ass too.
I took...one winch chun lesson at a seminar from a dude who I think can use it. The funny thing is, that stuff is more likely to work when you're off their centerline. Which is why kali arm trappy stuff is more viable, bc it's closer to fighting for a wrestling two on one or arm drag vs trying to close off arms while you're in front of all his weapons ( and in position for him to shoot on you ).
kali likes to be on the outside and have constant movement too with grappling and head movement. wing chun gets murked by FMA
I haven't watched this yet, but I'm already excited for the comments and fallout
I'm a bit confused--yeah I'm sure there's strict and useless ideas of the centerline, but I always assumed it was just a way of thinking about and managing space? It's not very different from "straight punches hit fastest" and occupying that space with guards/smothers/your own blows. Even just throwing out a mummy guard, if you're not being an idiot with it. That's without talking about stepping off and footwork generally. It seems like there's lots of ways of understanding the centerline/direct paths that work just fine?
Yeah, something something shoulders are off-center anyway, but that seems a deliberately narrow and uncharitable way of interpreting this. Lot of narrow and uncharitable ways practitioners apply this too, but. Y'know.
spoken about as well as someone who doesn't understand wing chun, refuses to see his own contradictions about getting off the center line for HIS purposes but doesn't allow wing chun practitioners to do the same (which multiple lineages train to get off the centerline all the time), and doesn't understand how to generate power without a large wind up move to gain momentum.
You sound like someone who just doesn’t understand the ancient wisdom of Leung Ting and the black dragon wing chun society. I dare you to fight another wing chun practitioner (who isn’t me) and has never won a real fight themselves, but presents themselves as a real tough guy.
Outside of that though, this is definitely one of your best videos to date. Great work!
This comment made me chuckle, have a like 👍🏻
That is funny. See you in Ramsey Dewey and Fight Commentary Breakdowns.
"Generating power solely by stepping into your strike often fail to do sufficient damage"
Shoot the point from Sprechfenster go brrrrr
Strangely this is almost exactly what Rocky Marciano recommend to do for generating power. He called it a "drop step"
@@ehisey there are many ways to generate power. As long as you accelerate sufficient mass with your hard parts into their soft parts, it will be enough
@@-_ellipsis_-5219 I believe you missed the snark.
@@ehisey I'll take the L 😂
As someone that has practiced Wing Chun for 8 years, my understanding of the Centerline Theory was a bit different. The Centerline was an efficient way to teach a variety of concepts in a short amount of time: Short-Distance Power, Hand Speed, Balancing, Pivoting, and Reacting on One Tempo.
*Short-Distance Power*
Wing Chun punches were designed for smaller fighters to maximize damage against bigger fighters by striking their center of mass FROM your center of mass. Other styles do this as well, but the vertical fist protects the hand in bare knuckle altercations. (Old school bareknuckle boxers used vertical fists for the same reason).
It’s the same power behind the One Inch Punch (which isn’t really hard to learn btw) and can be generated from ANY stance.
*Hand Speed*
Keeping the hands on the centerline is meant for responding quickly to incoming attacks and increasing the volume of strikes that can be thrown. If you’re familiar with Wing Chun, you’d know that 90% of the techniques are defensive. There’s only so many strikes that can be thrown from the center, but it’s fine since you’re training for short distance power anyway.
*Balancing*
The Centerline is essentially your center of mass. Normal fighters use bladed stances to make themselves smaller targets while shifting in and out of range. However, Wing Chun doesn’t get a lot of credit for it’s footwork potential.
Take up the classic Wing Chun stance, lift up your foot a couple inches from the ground towards the direction you want to go, and press off your back foot into that direction. All Wing Chun hand techniques (and some kicks) can be performed with this footwork without losing balance.
*Pivoting*
One criticism that I agree with about Wing Chun is occupying the Centerline making you vulnerable to outside attacks. The answer I was given for attacks that land off center was to take the blow and pivot off into a counter, but my floating ribs taught me this was a very bad idea. I’m thankful it wasn’t my head.
The answer I came up with was to turn that disadvantage into an advantage by baiting my opponent into an outside attack. I can press on their forearm and shift my centerline off target (side stepping if needed), and realign my hands towards their center of mass. This is really good for chin shots, liver shots, neck chops, sweeps, or (if you give absolute no fucks) one of the coldest hooks you’ll throw in your life.
*Reacting on One Tempo*
Wing Chun is designed to maximize a smaller person’s aggression in close range. The techniques don’t look that effective at first glance, because they’re meant to be combined with other principles. When attacks come at you, you always need to respond with One Tempo (attacking while defending). In a self defense scenario, you become someone that your attacker has to respect, or else they’ll get punished immediately. In a one on one fight, it’s an excellent way to keep aggressive opponents on the back-foot and gain momentum without exhausting yourself.
You won't get a response on this because this represents actual thought, consideration, and practice. Look at the top comment: he's not just arguing a strawman he made up about what "most WC" claims is centerline theory (totally untrue, it should be noted), but is defending that idea with the nonsense rationalization that people have "wildly different" opinions about that. That logic can justify *any* nonsense position or strawman.
In any case, there's certainly no "center plane", and you're *not* just static and blocking outwards, opening up. *Everything* looks "stupid" and "wrong" when you don't actually learn anything about it and don't actually represent it anywhere close to accurately.
WC is a criminally underrated *close range* striking system that pairs well with a lot of other arts, and it is successful in its niche *because* of proper application of centerline theory (which was neither demonstrated nor understood in this video). Shame that the people speaking the loudest about everything tend to be the least intellectually honest.
@@ultmast I’ve been thinking a lot about Wing Chun becoming a sport for the past few days.
Wing Chun has never been thoroughly tested in the one environment where it markets itself for: close in spaces.
Put two WC fighters in a ring half the size of a wrestling ring and let them duke it out for points. Landing blows, sweeping, throwing, and pressuring each other out the ring can rack up points, or they could go for the knock out.
It’ll put these half baked theories about WC to bed, and allow WC practitioners to test their application.
@@vipercrane190
> Wing Chun has never been thoroughly tested in the one environment where it markets itself for: close in spaces
I would say *sport* is where it hasn't been thoroughly tested, and that's an important distinction. It *has* been tested in real situations, including by me, but in sport it's only been tested by a limited set of people (ex: Alan Orr's Iron Wolves or Qi La La). I would not describe that as "thorough", as you say, just some good data points.
> Put two WC fighters in a ring half the size of a wrestling ring and let them duke it out for points. Landing blows, sweeping, throwing, and pressuring each other out the ring can rack up points, or they could go for the knock out.
I mean we used to do that, 20 years ago. Full gear, full out. Knockouts, broken bones, concussions. Technique was pressure tested. It wasn't intended to prove anything, though. I'll admit, I'd pay to see it, like Karate Kombat. Good WC strikers fighting in a Sanda format would be fun as hell to watch.
> It’ll put these half baked theories about WC to bed, and allow WC practitioners to test their application.
I think the problem is that people like OP don't ever actually experience most of what they bullshit about. An entire generation gets their information from RUclips, not the mat. Without *feeling* it they'll just see what they want to see. It's the same thing in every thread:
Throw a punch? You're a Boxer. Grab someone? You're a wrestler or do BJJ. Show *any other MA* working? They're just doing bad kickboxing.
@@vipercrane190 I don't like the idea of a purely points system in any martial arts, as I think that it severely waters it down even more than it already is (I mean, look at what happened to Taekwondo and point Karate). A points system would bias itself way too much to the guy with the faster hands or longer reach (This happened to Rokas back in his Wing Chun training for example) an not necessarily the guy who can land the finishing blow or time himself a good counter. My suggestion is ring outs and knockouts only, or a limited points system that only counts damaging strikes.
Centerline can be good short hand for head and hand placement and movement.
The real value of Wing Chun is the trapping and sticking, which isn’t going to work unless you actually practice fighting, and is better learned as a part of an overall martial arts game.
Right on. At my own WC school, the applications and techniques that were taught were very solid, but it fell apart due to lack of full movement sparring. Chi-sau became the substitute for sparring rather than a drill to improve sparring and i think that might be the case in alot of WC schools unfortunately. I still believe WC is a rich discipline with alot to offer combat sports if they would just step out of their own box for a minute and take some pointers from said combat sports. Like for example if a WC practitioner would get into some real kickboxing sparring and learn what its like to operate in that space (and get beat up a bit), I believe one could actually make WC shine in the clinch range once they've had some practical experience outside of their comfort zone. The tools are there but we're not really using them.
"Absorb what is useful, discard what is useless, and add what is specifically your own." - Bruce Lee
Stop quoting a movie actor who never fought anybody.
@@randombencounter263 Keep yapping man!😁
@@randombencounter263 Famous, wealthy, successful, well-liked. What's not to admire?
just magically analyze stuff correctly its ez
@@institches2750 I feel like this is a trick-question because anyone who answered with “Life-span” probably wins the game.
I did Wing Chun for a while... Never heard of this version of centerline.... I always thought it was in reference to your opponents and yours individual lines of balance and that the "centerline" was basically a pole in the center of u or ur opponent going from the floor to your head... In my mind the centerline was used to demonstrate balance and how to try and throw someone off balance while maintaining yours... But then my wing Chun teacher always taught us 50/50 stance as opposed to the 70/30 that most traditional wing Chun uses... So idk if other schools did teach this "center line plane" thing... Basically our centerline theory was to make sure we didn't hunch too forward or throw punches that over extended and messed with our balance, basically the main reason we fight up close to avoid that, and then we would as u demonstrated change positions (go off of the face to face line or whatever it's called) but still attacking our opponents centerline/centerpole/balance... basically if the opponent was "pushing" their energy and commiting to one direction we would change angles and let them over extend or get off balance and attack from a different angle
You remember well!
Yeah totally agree. This video is not referring to anything I know of as Wing Chun.
@@savoirfaire6181 Same here. I'm starting to think this guy makes stuff up so he can criticize it. Everyone is wrong but him it seems to me. Cheers!
@@kaoskronostyche9939 Controversy is a good strategy for social media algos I guess. He has good points but also burns straw men and chases red herrings.
We are taught that there are 3 centreline, the one that runs through the body, central axis (you call pole) which we aim to (how deep we punch, to the centre of the opponent) which you have explain. The 2nd one runs down the front of the body. It's really a few inches thick. This is where all the soft spots are on the body (including the knee shin and ankle when the leg is forward. The 3rd one it the one that joins you to your opponent (badly and very wrongly described in this video). The hands to the elbows form more of a triangle (a lot of Wing Chun is based on the triangle because it is a strong shape for distribution of oncoming force). The centreline that connects you to your opponent move with your opponent. So if your opponent moves left or right, you turn to keep facing them so they have to come down your centreline. If they punch off centreline (a slower punch), we know they are going to come back onto the centreline because that's where the target is, eg, a hook. A hook can be beaten to the strike or it can be jammed at the elbow with a good Tan Sau and punch (stepping in) Wing Chun does not...in fact NEVER blocks of parrys outwardly as in this video. We pivot. If it's going to miss, why block. We call this chasing hands. By using a Tan Sau (for example) for the incoming punch, deflecting the force and not taking it all on, and punching with the other hand SIMULTANEOUSLY and hitting before the attack "has finished " as we turn (pivot on the heels) we punch down a "new" centreline. The one I'm looking down as I look at my opponent. The centreline is whichever way I'm facing (were my opponent is) it's not a "fixed" line
5:44 As the coach screams "Get your head offline" and i ask myself what he means by it, as i ran face first into a one two, then i got what he meant
Are you refering to the wing chun guard ( which i agree is a bit daft) or center line theory as they are vastly different? Centre line ( the line in the middle of the body) and central line ( the line bettween yours and your oponents center line) ( different things but usually used together not in isolation) is in Many many martials arts to one degree or another not just wing chun based ones
The wide eye when she changed the centerline too, lol. Cracked me up
It's both very annoying and very amusing how many Wing Chun practitioners comments are like "Center Line Theory is actually this" or "Wing Chun teaches you all about moving off-line".
Wow, it's almost like there's no one consistent curriculum to your ancient chinese knife-less hand-trapping martial art. I'm not gonna learn 10 years of bad grip fighting when I can just practice the same concepts anywhere else but without a ton of bullshit attached.
Yes, but what about middle geometry hypothesis?
I’m loving your sound arguments. Normally I just roll my eyes at RUclips “fight science” guys, but you consistently hit the mark.
Lol i was going to try and argue but you're fucking right lol
Alright how about this!! 2:31 if we see how Wing Chun is used in movies (yeah that's stupid but as they use actual wing chun moves, pls bear with me), we can see that this is kind of what happens, yet the Wing Chun practitioners doesn't just mover their arm like that, they will mover the other one at the same time, may it be to block the incoming attack, or to create an attack themselves if their opponents doesn't throw something instantly. And this is basically the point of Wing Chun, because unless they go for a clinch or move away inmediately, you are succesfully trapping! in that specific scenario, things were going to look exactly like in Wing Chun forms, you wait for an attack (which is kind of a bad idea but...), block/parry it and then while you are making contact with them, you are supposed to "feel" their next attack, and then intercept it. Of course this is hard to with someone who is actually trying to hurt you, and even harder if they are trained, but it has it's uses, and in my opinion it can work in self defense against a untrained and violent attacker, as Wing Chun has a lot of block/parry chaining (many blocks that come one after the other) in their forms, meaning that they are meant for someone that is attacking you non-stop. Anyways, i would rather use Judo or something else lol
Interesting video! I like that you adressed how classic boxing uses the centerline concept. Even if only as a basic idea of where a counter straight is going to be, it's sound boxing to preemptively move your head away.
I am curious as to what you make of sport fencing, specifically épée in this context. It's very niche, I'll admit, but when your weapon is entirely designed around poking in a straight line, do you think that the idea of a centerline holds more merit?
In the case of fencing, centerline definitely does hold more merit. Even the way I use longsword is very dependent on the centerline.
In certain weapon arts, centerline can be very important. In fencing, it's actually a very large portion of the game. If you're always on centerline, you basically win lol
I think Wing chun uses centerline because it was originally practiced with butterfly swords. I might be wrong but many of the trapping/sticky arms, etc, techniques were come up with so that you can deflect and control the opponents weapon. Just my theory though
I look forward to your next video about this in about five years. It'll be interesting to see what new insights you'll have then.
Centre line theory in competitive combat sports, does fencing count?
I guess that does count lol
Dude, THANK you. Regardless of your style, if you hang out in the “center line” in unarmed combat, you’re just gonna have a shit time. We’ve gotta learn (those of us that practice styles that are based on weapon use) that there are some horrible false cognates when we translate weapons to empty hand. It can’t be done without rigorous testing.
Wing Chun doesn't advocate doing that though, they typically teach to NOT he in your opponents centerline, ie get off angle.
Question,have you ever trained properly in wing chun, like years of training not just for a short time! ?
Nope. I wouldn't waste years of my life on something that only looks worse the more information I get about it.
However, I have spent years learning striking and centerline concepts as they apply to weapons, so I do have good experience on whether you can apply the centerline to striking.
I have trained in wing chun now for 37 years, so probably wasn't a lot of my life 😅 😬 😜
I know basically Jack shit about the striking part, but the HEMA was right. I love hearing the word Gambeson outside of the HEMA community. The long sword stance chosen is really only used for beginners or when fighting someone vastly better than you, I much prefer fool's guard or plow.
So happy that you talked about longswords. Truly one of the few 'sports' where it really matters.
But I would have hit through the first block :P
Your centerline is always changing. If you think fighting on your centerline means, "run in a straight line attacking", your wrong. Your centerline is your core, your balance, the thing you should protect. Beyond that, In Wing Chun you can see the centerline relatively affects where it is most efficient to push or pull when trapping. Wing chun teaches a technique called trapping where from bridging a block or strike you maneuver your opponents weapons away from you and or trap them against their body. If a right punch is thrown and deflected with the left wrist w/o crossing eithers' centerline each person can use their adjacent arm to push and free the first arm to strike. If the centerline is crossed then the adjacent arm can more efficiently pull, trapping the arm and freeing their initial arm. You can try to pull when you should push but you'll be wasting effort and energy or you may have to change arms or positions and reestablish a centerline. Wing Chun trys to be as efficient as it can using as little energy as possible. This is just one example of how knowledge of your centerline affects the efficiency of your fighting. Wing Chun and the martial arts are a complex manipulation of time a space.
I think positional advantage is a better concept. Putting yourself in a position where are more likely to be able to hit your opponent and they are less likely to hit you. Not being directly in front of your opponent (or on their centerline) is the most simple way to gain positional advantage. It’s a small part of a larger concept
In a WC straight punch you bring/pull your elbow from the side into the center line, so your forearm and fist is on the center
Great to see some HEMA slipping in (especially Fiore), and interestingly when I saw the title my first through was "what about weapons?" So you got me, good work.
I know that Wing Chun also does have some really interesting weapon forms (and strangely often oversized weapons) so possibly it's a principle back ported from weapons to unarmed to keep consistency (to it's own detriment).
He's good at that. Another one of his had me ready to comment, and then it was his next line. Sneaky cheeky bastard. 🤣
Even with weapons there are some notable downsides to holding a guard on the centre line, like it doesn't physically cover any particular line of attack and gives your opponent more options in how they can go around it, meaning you have more decisions to make correctly in order to defend yourself. And like you said, with a heavy weapon you can't generate any effective attack from there (except a thrust) without moving to a different position to "load up" first.
So it makes sense that it's seen most with things like rapiers, relatively quick, agile, long weapons that stab real good, can cover you in that position with large, protective hilts that can physically block off a fair amount of target area if you extend them out in front of you, can recover and change directions quickly, and can be effectively weilded while holding them a long way out and getting yourself in behind them in a low or profiled position that offers no target that can't be defended with a small motion.
@1:00 , oh... I was about to chime in about controlling the line in my tradition along with how and why it works. Then you immediately addressed my tradition (although vaguely). My tradition includes Liechtenauer & Meyer :-)
You run that later are you clarified that there's a lot of actions (most) where the express point is to get off the line.
This concept came up in Japanese sword. Lot of it boiled down to “point sword at enemies face”. Like you said - very weapons focused.
Unarmed theory is like… make a triangle with your arms - fingers pointed at partner. That shape, when rigid, can block a lot of things and deflect off to the shoulder.
It’s not foolproof - for sure, but something to consider.
“What’s the shortest path to the target - straight down the center”
If controling the center line is so effective at defending, why are most knockouts from circular strikes? The kick that knocks out people the most is the roundhouse and for punches there's the hook. None of those come from or target the central line.
I don't think you understand how much lateral movement is used in wing chun
Hey man great video. Curious to get your take on Richard Dimitris shredder principle (Sinshiedo)
After watching a little bit of it, he has some valid views (12-6 elbows do not stop someone from taking you down, grapplers often crush strikers, certain moves are only useful from the right range, etc.) and he's clearly paid attention to actual fights.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the shredder principle, but he's dramatically overapplying it. He starts to dismiss punches and even the rear-naked choke in favor of the shredder. He claims that a RNC can take 5-12 seconds to choke someone out (true) and that that is too long (false). So he advises using the other hand to shred their face while finishing the choke. All that does is risk losing the actual choke, and gives your opponent an opportunity to escape.
It seems that his entire concept of fighting boils down to "fight dirty," which isn't exactly new or revolutionary. Plus, it's inherently escalatory, which I've explained in other videos.
He's trying to sell scratching, gouging, and biting as an entire method of fighting, which it's not. It's a small set of moves with a fairly narrow application in both the continuum of force and in tactically winning a fight.
And, against a trained fighter, I highly suspect that it won't work at all. Mainly because we already do a lot of those things in sparring. Pushing the face, smothering, chin straps, pulling the nose, cranking their neck, etc. That's a normal part of BJJ rolling, and it doesn't do much. It's either used to bait a reaction in setting-up a specific move, or it's just used to annoy them. I don't think I can remember a single time that any of those moves altered the outcome of a roll/match. Granted that that doesn't include things like eye gouges and biting, but it's still a noticeable percentage of what he teaches. What he calls the "soft shred" is perfectly legal in MMA, BJJ, and wrestling. And it just doesn't do much. The idea that you "can't stop it" is wrong. When you're already on the ground, the shredder puts your hands in a very precarious position, and you need fairly extensive grappling skills in order to keep your arms safe from a trained fighter. There are absolutely times when I would use something similar, but only for very specific purposes and only because I have the grappling skills to keep myself safe against most people. If I put my hands on a black belt's face, I would almost immediately lose my arms.
I know he's claimed to have used it on grapplers and even BJJ black belts, but I can't find any of those videos.
Plus, stopping a BJJ guy from taking you down really isn't impressive. Even a lot of black belts have 0 effective takedowns. Doing it to a black belt when you're already on the ground would likely be a different story.
My disclaimer on all of this is that I might not have the full picture because I could only watch like 30 minutes of his explanation before I was overpowered by cringe and had to turn it off. So, I haven't seen everything, but what I have seen is not great.
This is an incredibly literal interpretation. Most wing chun techniques are using both hands at the same time. The center line is a concept to organize a chaotic interaction. You are supposed to step off line to change angles and engage. You are just taking an incredibly literal look at this, I recommend looking into wing chun again and not summarizing the Wikipedia version.
Interesting points made here. What is the name of the outro song?
Off topic, but were you in drum line or marching band in high school?
Nope. Why do you ask?
Drummers spot fellow drummers. It must have been your metronome references.
@@taiwanontwowheels8214 Ah! You'll be glad to know that I have indeed played the drums! But like a drumset! So, you're still right!
Dude was literally going to say I learnt centre line for broad sword. I did Wing Chun, prior to MMA, your example in the video was so apt, got my nose Booped when trainer showed me the flaws. So like you pointed out centre line became a either a danger zone or a position you move to create exploits. But mostly was taught to forget it. Thanks for these videos
i once killed a man? using the centerline alone not a single strike was thrown, my control of the centerline was so dominant they had no chance of surviving i send flowers to their family on the anniversary of my centerline only victory
Well they don’t call it center line but my wrestling coach (at a bjj school not regular wrestling) talks about a bull rush style double where you use your somewhere on the center line to do a blast double without having to do a full shot
In wing chun it's bit fixated on their guard stance, but in jkd it's more flexible, we don't fixate our guard on center line but instead we have 2 barriers, front and back in a bladed stance, but we tend to land our attacks favoured in the center line.
Keep in mind that bruce lee decided that traditional martial arts are bullshit after he learned wing chun
In wing chun you don't chase hands. If someone is coming around, you go straight forward. If someone throws a straightish punch in your example, you're supposed to move forward and stuff/trap that hand before it gets extended. Center line is not strictly a thin line down the center of the body it extends the trunk of the body and narrows as one gets closer in clench range.
The people in Indonesia have effective, practical, and comprehensive fighting arts called Silat. Silat protects the center and outside areas of the body as well! Silat has striking, wrestling, grappling, joint locking movements that provide self-defense and build up the person's mind, body, and spirit!!!
I'd like to hear your opinion of the Wing Chun Wooden Dummy and form/s
Nailed it, wing chun is a weapon art. Most traditional arts are in fact weapon arts. The rest is just marketing.
I think thats why in traditional WC systems, the weapons are taught last. Those weapons are simplistic so that the techniques can be adapted for whatever weapon you happen to be using. My Sifu said, although he was purposely exagerating a bit, was that the whole system is basically designed to teach you how to use the knives (butterfly swords, whatever), everything else is preliminary.
Yes, the direct centerline in most styles of Wing Chun is fairly useless. In reality: every radian around a person’s center is the centerline. So you can go through someone’s center from the flank or rear. You can also move through the center of a limb to control or damage a joint. Likewise, all effective techniques either move towards our center (like a hook or round kick) or emerge from our center (like a straight punch or side kick).
Attacking the centreline would not land a hit if the opponent dodges, but positioning your hand near the centreline can make it easier to trap the incoming punch.
This is so awesome!! I have said something similar (though not as eloquently as you) for some time, and have mentioned this in my podcast. Bad hand-to-hand concepts sometimes are good weapons concepts. I think this is why so many WC practitioners gravitate to weapons like sticks i.e.Kali etc. as it makes intuitive sense to them, whereas much of modern functional combat sports arts do not. While I can't speak for the Chinese tradition in depth I can say that much bad hand to hand combat from the Japanese tradition is actually weapon combat movements and weapon combat footwork. Wing Chun makes much more sense if you put two swords in their hands. That being said, your points on footwork are very apt and absolutely true. I have heard some stories that arts that do not stress foot work developed in places where foot work was less possible, like tight alleyways or swampy jungles etc. Anyway this video was fantastic!! Thank you!!!!
I learned Chinese mainland Wing Chun and my Sifu told me that centerline theory was flat wrong. He said instead to move offline to the outside, as a general rule. Kind of like triangle footwork in Kali. Centerline's only use was as a target to drive traps into since it contained center of mass and force driven into it would be most difficult to deal with. So step off line, drive opponent's guard into his center line in an aggressive attack which may involve striking with both arms at the same time with, one clearing his guard and the other attacking the target. It was all about how to attack opponent's center of mass while also attacking other targets simultaneously.
"This concept has virtually no application outside of weapons combat. First of all, punches don't come down the center line. Punches originate from your shoulders, neither of which is on the center line."
*Bill "Superfoot" Wallace has entered the chat.*
"Punches originate from the shoulders" yes, I too just extend my punches straight out from my shoulders. I don't rotate my hips or anything, just stick them straight out!
@@Xur______ Yes, but he showed that as you rotate to get your fist to the "centerline", the center line shifts with you and your hips. Almost like your punches don't come from the center of the body.
So in Wing Chun, they do only guard the centerline and bate the opponent to attack their defenseless areas. However, the belief is that when an attack comes in circularly, then your straight attacks will defeat them. Problem is, like you pointed out, one can easily just step off to create a different centerline. So the one they're still holding is now useless. This is why I believe that all Kung Fu was originally 90% grappling, and the striking arts started from self defense, not 1 vs 1 freestyle fighting. For example, there's a lot of hikite (pulling hand) techniques in Karate. But that pulling hand only works as and actual pull when you are in a grappling range and combat starts from self defense. So when someone puts their hands on you and you respond from a natural position, some of this centerline theory stuff might actually be valid. But that's only because you're controlling the fight from a very close position given that the fight started in a self defense situation. But as soon as we start 1vs 1 freestyle fighting, the centerline goes completely off the rails.
I'm not doing wing chun, but does it make more sense if you think in terms of direction of attack? Or isn't that the same thing? So you can get out of that line while you still face your opponent to attack him while being safe like a check hook or slip cross.
so... when is the closing theme soundtrack on spotify?
Wing chun does use a weapons called butterfly swords (for each hand a sword), so maybe wing chun was originally a weapon based system and in the past some people thought it could be used also for hand to hand fights.
I love that you bring up swords. Centerline is a big deal with fencing. That might be why the thought was associated with fighting in general and stuck around so long?
Interesting. When I first saw this I was like “idk, it seems pretty effective with swords and staffs (…staves? 🤷🏻♂️),” but good points in the difference and, of course, its never solely about controlling the center even with swords.
Many have theorize, that Wing Chun originates from butterfly sword combat. longsword, being a two-handed weapon, isn't a good comparison I think.
And butterfly swords aren't good swords
The point of demonstrating longsword was that it is NOT like hand-to-hand fighting
@@holywaterbottle3175 Personally I'll use spear, but what do I know, I not a poor sailor that fights in cramp cargo hold and narrow alley. Also if you're good, you can make anything work, even a stick.
@@siegebug this comment... God help me
This one is gonna ruffle some feathers
4:25 Hi AV stepping into your strikes doesn't cause damage? What did you mean? In my experience it definitely does. Interesting video BTW!
It means that swinging or extending your arm and/or rotating your body is important in gathering enough kinetic energy to matter. Stepping forward without significantly moving your arm results in a very low-speed impact.
Many wing chun practitioners claim that commanding centerline allows you to simply step forward to hit your opponent. But they advocate relatively little arm movement and almost no hip rotation. That means that the punch might have a lot of weight behind it, but it will be moving very slowly.
@@ArmchairViolence makes sense. Thanks Bro
is there a similar concept which is called centerline in boxing as well?
Imagine you and your opponent are fighting on a tightrope. The only strikes allowed are head butts to the groin.
The only time centre line matters outside of what you have already covered. Is what trying to move someone, if you want to move them you wabt the force to go to the centre of their body. This creates a connection between you and the opponent that allows you to move them and not just a limb.
An easy way to work on this is to just grab them by the elbows and try and move them. If you first move your mass into their centre then moving them becomes easier.
It’s funny cause in Stage Combat we focus on the center line, but in regards to not crossing your partner’s center line when possible for safety…again those are mostly with weapons.
I don't know if this counts as "centerline" but, in boxing if your hands are inside of your opponents you take some of his power away, and you are more likely to score first.
Jesus, not only can he kick my ass in the ring; but in a duel of honor, he's also a excellent swordsman. Taking Renaissance man to a new level.
Why is that I learned more about sword fighting in few seconds from hand 2 hand martial art channel then from watching the actual Hema channels for years?
You're probably watching the wrong HEMA channels, not to take away from OP
@@KevinTangYT Metatron, Skallagrim, Shadiversity. But as I getting more experience in martial arts and because I live in an age where i can watch instructions from high level grapplers from all around the world,
I have more and more doubts about their skills and how legit they are, as time goes.
@@katokianimation Blood & Iron HEMA, Academy of Historical Fencing, Scholagladiatoria, London Longsword Academy, Zac Evans, Adorea Olomouc and Akademia Szermierzy and a few others are HEMA channels run by actual instructors that train for a living, maybe check those out.
The channels you mentioned are mostly history enthusiasts interested in HEMA but more interested in its history than combat skills; with all due respect to them, while their knowledge is vast and deep in their chosen fields, pure combat skill is not one of those.
@@Vlad_Tepes_III This. They're more commentators than martial arts channels. You wouldn't learn to play sports from watching sports commentators.
@@Vlad_Tepes_III thank you unironacally, i saved this list and i will check it out them. The only person I familiar with is Matt Easton from Scholagladiatoria. I know he is very skilled. But his videos are not for me. Don't know why I have hard time to sit trough his videos. The sparring sruff he uploaded is cool though. Mad respect for his art and his skills.
Centerline is a concept that has a key importance in the tactile training of chi sao. Chi sao is a type of dynamic and non-linear tactile training, similar to push hands. Abstraction, to a lesser extent than push hands, but still an abstraction. The whole idea is to move yourself off the opponent's center line and keep the opponent on your center line. This is the concept of the sword, which probably inspired some old master who designed the wing chun guard and punch based on it. I won't go into the practical application of it, but the chi sao exercise itself is very rewarding, physically and mentally, and the risks are very small.
It seems to me a lot of ideas like this happen when something actually useful gets "doctrinized" and then regurgitated by people who don't know what they're talking about or how it was meant to apply in the first place.
It's all very well saying (about 4:14) that no one holds position for more than a second and then using very static looking examples of why centre line is no good. You most vulnerable points are predominantly on your centre line - the object is to protect them as best you can. Also, does a punch come from your shoulder, your elbow or your fist?
Duuude, I was just about to yell "longsword". Didn't know you also did historical fencing :^D .
Yep. When I went to do some wing chun it was that lack of lateral movement which really made me realise it was rubbish. Indeed, I'm not against cente line, but more for throwing and grappling. You want to move around and attack in front of you, while they're looking in a different direction.
the main application problem is that wing tsun was not invented for indivdual self defence in open space but for civilan monastery defence in tightly packed stone fortified village alleyways and buildings, shoulder to shoulder and with the problem of potentially getting trampled rather than anyone having the space to move off line. under these circumstances, moving off line with your head is hard, swinging almost impossible and leaning on the back foot means you ll be held by the guys behind you who strike over your shoulders from behind. it also explains the rather improvised choice of weaponry. the chain punch and the basics of the system can be taught to civilians in a short time and with a few drills, you have a wall of punching and kicking farmers blocking the pathways of a monastery/palace village
I like the explanation that Wing Chun is basically a grapple-striking art, where everything happens in the clinch, and there I think you do have a concept of center control, not necessarily to throw or block punches, but to disrupt their balance and leverage. I also think most Chinese Kung Fu is made for weapons, and probably the Wing Chun center-line concept comes from their long-staff work.
As a wing chun guy, I already predicted what your main point was before I clicked on your video! So I was not so fussed with your argument.
The centerline is just the axis along your median plane, Wing Chun teaches me to off-balance someone's centerline.
I’m a wing chun practitioner in need of testing my skills. I’d be happy to spar you.
You are aware that wing tsun teaches punching by entering center line.. meaning using the fastest/shortest way to strike your opponent. In theory it should give u an advantage when defending.
When I trained with an indoor student of Garrett Gee's branch we only heard about "the box" for theory. Basically, the shoulders and hips make a rectangle and the hands can move toward or away from the center within the box. Also, moving out of the box typically leads to power loss. I have only heard about centerline theory from the Western students whose line goes back to Ip Man. Anyway, this Baguazhang nerd is more than happy to spar within agreed upon rules if anyone comes to Phoenix, Arizona area for a visit.
Yep, it’s of Yip Man’s doing. Not the same in continental wing chub, absent from Vietnamese vingtsuan
Wouldn't wing chun attacking with fists already on the centreline fix the issue? Also wouldn't using two hands simultaneously one for blocking ht either assuredly occupying the centreline already for a strike solve this issues as well ? And wouldn't chasing the centreline always be the fastest quickest path to striking someone in any scenario outside of wing chun as well ?
I have a nagging feeling the WC centreline theory is not quite what you made it out to be, but then again I don't do Wing Chun, so maybe I'll shut up.
You're correct....there's much more to it.
As someone that really loved learning Wing Chun this hurt a bit to hear at first, but you're pretty spot on with your analysis.
When I was learning Wing Chun, they spoke about Center Line theory, but they also included "central lines" into the mix. (It's been a few years so I may be misremembering) But essentially the central lines are 45° pointing out from the cebter line, basically imagine two imaginary lines that start in your spine and go out through your shoulders.
The basic premise was, you want to get your central line off target using footwork while punching off your central lines. It was mostly to help with your stance and footwork, since if you were in a proper (Southern Temple style) Wing Chun stance, your central line would be about 45° offline from your opponent while you faced them with your lead shoulder.
What really helped me about "punching of your central line" was footwork, and learning how to actually just move my hand forward to punch instead of reflexively winding up or pulling back.
I know my explanation wasn't great, but if anyone does have questions I'll do my best to answer.
Guess who just lost all their social credit though. Checkmate, counter-revolutionaries.