windwalker wrote:Looks like good practice.
Br Wu wrote:if you can neutralize force of opponent , you do not need strong force, 4 Oz is enough.
Might be better to understand that "if one can neutralize, their own force they can lead the others".
Robert Chuckrow wrote:Fig. 2. In part (a) of the above figure, a person is pushing a door with a force of magnitude F to the right.
Part (b) shows the force exerted by the person on the door.
Part (c) shows the reaction force of an equal magnitude F to the left, exerted by the door on the person.
It is a consequence of Newton’s third law that, when a person exerts a force on a door, the door exerts an equal and opposite force on the person.
Conclusion: By controlling the force you exert on the opponent, you automatically control his force on you.
https://www.chuckrowtaichi.com/ChengCh.7.html
Might be better to understand that "a very powerful attack can be deflected with a very small force." The Chen Ziqiang and other gifs I posted show a no touch action (e.g., footwork) causing a reaction, then neutralizing that force. Which is why I have said, "control with no contact > 1 point contact > 2 point contact > 3 point contact."
Robert Chuckrow wrote:4. “A Force of 1,000 Pounds can be deflected with a Force of Four Ounces.” What is meant by this oft-quoted saying is that a very powerful attack can be deflected with a very small force. How this defense can occur will be analyzed in the next sections. However, the wording of this saying leads to misunderstanding in explanations using physics because it does not make sense in terms of Newton’s third law. According to that law, if there is a force of 1,000 pounds, it must be exerted on something (or somebody) that (or who) exerts 1,000 pounds back. Here, the force that the opponent exerts would be on you, and you of course would exert an equal and opposite force back on him. But the main idea is not to interact with the opponent in a way that can cause injury to yourself. The goal is to exert minimal force on the opponent and not interfere with his motion—only redirecting his attack to clear your body. Using minimal force on the opponent means that you don’t need a lot of strength. It also means that he will, by Newton’s third law, use minimum force on you, which lessens the chance that you will be injured. Not interfering with the opponent’s motion means that he will be more likely to over-extend and lose his balance. Then, he will either fall or pull back. If he pulls back, you can easily push or hit him.
Maybe the opponent intends to exert 1,000 pounds of force on you, but he can’t because of the manner in which you interact with him. It is simply incorrect for an attack to be described in terms of an opponent’s “incoming force,” and, therefore, it is incorrect to analyze the neutralization in such terms.