Mantis Vs Wing Chun clip

[mantis108]

Just found this clips on the KFO main board provided by Fa Jing.

http://users.1st.net/abaddon/kfo/wcvsmantissparring.wmv

I made some inquiries about the clip. Here's my post:

<<<Mantis108 wrote:

Hi Fa Jing
Thanks for sharing the clips. I am curious as to the clip of Wing Chun Vs Northern Mantis. Could you give some background to who's who and the general rules that are applied in the match there. By looking at the way they moved, I believe the black shirt blue pants is from NPM (HK 7 Stars lineage?). But then it is weir that he's the one that's got taken down more often then the other. Also there was an occassion where he could have capitalize on the takedown (while he was being taken down) but didn't materialized I wonder if it was the rule or if it was his training that he let it go. Assuming the black shirt is a NPM player, I am a bit puzzle that he used very few fundamental PM techiques. There is no hook-grab-pluck type of technique which is essential to PM style of fighting. Again perhaps there are rules involved? Could you comment on that please. Thank you.

Regards

Mantis108>>>

To which Fa Jing responded.

<<<Fajing wrote:

Correct on who's who. The Mantis guy is Sifu Lee Lera. He studied 7-star NPM with Master Kwan as well as others. I don't think there really were rules other than not really trying to hurt the other guy. As for the takedowns - why would Mantis be any more proficient at avoiding the takedown than Wing Chun? Sounds like typical North-South myths to me. Wing Chun man (sifu Milan from Brazil) was pretty aggressive and he's talented. Mantis guy had better kicks although not by much. Now for the lack of distinctive wing chun/mantis motions....well look at the footwork. It's there. The hands, well - when you are standing across from someone who's about as talented as you are, you can't just do anything you want and it's not going to look pretty. If you slow it down you can see more of what's going on. Sifu Lera definitely lifted his elbows and did some of that side-swipe stuff. Compared to the Wing Chun guy who kept his elbows down.

Sifu Lera (mantis guy) was pretty good at the throat grab, nut grab when on the ground - don't know if you noticed that.>>>

My response there:

<<<Hi Fajing
Thank you once again for the clarifications.

First off, I am only sharing what my impression. It doesn't represent any other's opinion but mine. Any mistake would be solely mine.

Your point on the takedown and the talens involved are well taken. Personally, I don't think that all PM styles have the same training focus that's why there are stylistic differences. I brought that point up basically to illustrate that issue. IMHO Training focus should bring awareness. In this case there might be other reasons such as he might be trying to expirement with the ground range techniques or something. That we don't have much chance to see because they are almost immediately seperated as soon as they hit the ground.

Since his style is different than mine, I can only say that we would look at things diffferently. I also agreed that agressiveness plays a big part here as well. I admire his willingness to put his abilities to the test with fine opponent(s). I do think that we need more of that kind of event to bring PM out to the public eyes and in turn sharpen PM skills.

Thanks for pointing out those "grabs" on the ground. It would be interesting to see them working on the ground but I guess that's another thing that we can look forward to.

Regards

Mantis108>>>

To be continued...

[mantis108]

I have futher thoughts on this clips but due to a lack of reference point on the main board, I don't think it would be easy to make my points across there. So I would like to share with you these toughts.

First off, I am only sharing what my impression. It doesn't represent any other's opinion but mine. Any mistake would be solely mine. Also this is not personal attack on anyone or any style. It is only meant to be an exploration on sparring with Mantis as I see it.

I will stick to analyzing the NPM player here:

General flavor:

It would seem that the "longfist" focus and mentality are pretty evident in the approach here. I believe NPM is of the said focus so it is understandable that he approach the session that way.

Agressiveness:

As we can see that he is often "looking" for openning which is nothing inheritly wrong. However, this also shows that his training protocol is very likely based on that. There are techniques such as the "Dien Shou/Yang Jeung" (as found in 7 hands) that allows the PM stylist to be more aggressive. I think we need to descern the difference between self defense (more reactive) and competition sparring (more proactive). I believe it would help us more if we make that distinction. Tainan has also point out that the majority of PM trainings nowadays are too reactive. A lot of Mantis stylists just don't seem know how to "beat the other to the punch". So it would be productive to even out the passiveness with aggressiveness.

Closing the gap:

Here it is most evident the Changquan mindset is in effect most of the time. Closing the gap IMHO is an area where it is an art onto itself in PM. It would seem that his main concern here most of the time is to step in, therefore closing the gap and deliver some short of strikes (both punching and kicking). While there are attempts to use elbows (very few knees), the combinations of elbows and knees are not "delievered". I am of the opinion that the footwork is not there to support it.

Hand techniques:

I am sorry to say that there is very little of Hook-Grab-pluck type of "genetic marker" of PM here. Even the Chuan, Beng, Pi, Tso, etc are often not there. I wish to see more of sealing and Tie Kao but there isn't that much and there isn't really a "controlled/composed" use of those neither. Chin Na is also not attempted which could be explained. If one is to face a talented exponent of another style, it is safer not to be fancy.

Kicking:

I think his best talent is in the kicks and defense against kicks which I surmise he has been dealing with kicking styles such as TKD alot. His counter to kicks, especially catching and hooking them are quite excellent. Yet the follow up is not there. This I would think is due to the training focus as well. However, it is also of my humble opinion that tradition kicking technique and combos are not showcased here. There are a few good kicks and sweep but they are delivered with the longfist mindset. The result is less desireable IMHO.

Takedowns:

There are some attempts but it seems that there is not enough intention to throw it (pun intended). He seems to have predetermined that fight should be carried out on his feet not on his back so he often put his foot down on the takedown attempts by his opponent. But as the opponent is aggressive and relentless, he became prone to being takendown despite of the great effort.

Finally, I am under the impression that he "cares" to much about what the other guy will do than his own plan of attack. I believe this is something that we need to bear in mind while using mantis.

As I said before everyone or style has his/its own approach, these are just my observations about this clips. I admire the NPM player's willingness to test his skills with others. I think by doing so it will help sharpening PM skills

Mantis108

[mantisben]

The PM fighter didn't seem that aggressive. It appears to me that he didn't want to get aggressive and escalate the fight. It looked like a friendly test of hands. Not even a sparring session. The Wing-Chun fighter looked good and demonstrated that he would've landed some strikes after he took down the PM fighter.

When I learned about Wing Chun, I liked it. It is very practical, aggressive, and their techniques work. The Wing Chun fighting method is sound. I'm not a Wing Chun fighter.

I think if the PM fighter was more aggressive, these two fighters would've thrown alot more blows at one another. It looked like the Wing Chun fighter was more eager to "mix it up" than the PM fighter.

The footwork of the PM fighter to close the gap wasn't there. In the stories I've heard about the creation of PM, the PM hands were good, but the footwork wasn't. The footwork was bad, not practical, and lacking. So they added the footwork of the Monkey. This made PM hand techniques better. The Monkey footwork made the PM handwork more effective. More practical for hand-to-hand combat.

In my view of the Demo Fight, the PM fighter appeared to be holding back.

[BaldMonk]

I was a bit dissapointed in the lack of aggressiveness from the mantis practitioner. But, moreso in the lack of commitment of either participant, when it came to executing techniques that would give the oppontent what I like to call, 'something to work with'. I don't know if the lack of crisp commited techs was due to the fact that they were touching hands and not an actual challenge match but in my experience, both people learn more when both throw techniques with intent, and I didn't see that here. Using techniques with intention leaves you open to getting tagged though and maybe they didn't want that to happen. I've learned so much more from getting stung than holding back though. Props to them for testing their skills on video.. on the web.. and lettin' us armchair quarterback them. Much respect to them both.

[18elders]

I also don't think the mantis guy was aggressive enough, he allowed the Wing chun guy to play patty cake with his front hand way toooooo much. If he got away with it once it should've never happened again. He should've been in on him.
But this is my opinion and the way we train.
Appreciate the clip anyway

[mantisben]

Originally posted by BaldMonk
...Props to them for testing their skills on video.. on the web.. and lettin' us armchair quarterback them. Much respect to them both.

I agree. I've never heard the term "armchair quarterback", but in the context that you used the phrase, I think I know what it means.

Good Post!

[mantis108]

If this is really about not hurting but exercising your techs, then it is all the more reason to apply style specific techs.

18 Elders,

I think you would see many oppotunities in there to use the training from your favorite ling form - 18 Elders. Just imagine:

1. Diao Pi (could add Beng Chuan)
2. Tibu Diao Da (could add Deng Ta takedown, also a great way to avoid toe trap)
3. Deng Shan Die Zhou Beng Chui (could add Bimen Jiao)
4. Go lu Tsai (a great number of moves can follow)

This 4 moves combo (you can break them apart and resemble in a different order if need be) alone is quite excellent in this situation IMHO. Especially, when the opponent's training is more focus on centerline attacks. This 4 moves also convey the ideas of Fanche (both side of the body or lead & rear in support of each other, ie 1+2) Lulu (keep firing attacks from the same side once there is an openning, ie 3+4) which is the essence of mantis fighting approach IMHO. The beauty of it is that they are found in a form during the early stage of training.

Anyway, it is just some thoughts I have to share with you.

Warm regards

Mantis108

[yu shan]

The so called mantis guy in the blue looks like a Wah Lum "fighter" a perfect rendition.

Many, many missed oppurtunities... on both sides.

[Life long Student]

I don't know the context of there work out but, this seams typical of many traditional martial artists that I have ever seen, except for a very few. What they practice as a style is never reviled when "sparing, or play fighting". Most of what comes out is kick punch or grab. This is not to criticize but an observation.

[cerebus]

I enjoy seeing "style vs style" sparring matches. It's obvious this was just a friendly sparring match, nothing more. It was interesting to watch though. The Wing Chun guy was definitely more aggressive and was better at closing the gap as well as using the takedown & followup.I'm not sure about his using that high roundhouse kick to the head though, bad idea (the PM guy could've caught it for a takedown). I too was expecting to see the trademark mantis "grab & pull" into a rearhand strike from the PM dude, but of course things don't always work the way we'd like them to. Interesting to watch. T. :D

[wiz cool c]

mantis108 what website did that clip come from.

[mantis108]

I have no idea. I just got it from a thread on the main board here.

I find that interesting so I share the link with everyone here.

Regards

Mantis108

[yu shan]

This clip makes me feel that much more lucky. I mean the stuff my Shrfu teaches me, these two poor souls are clueless! Is it true they are teachers?

[Mantis9]

First and foremost, thank you Mantis108 for bringing us this clip and thank you to these two sifus for recording this event.

I agree with the lot of you that intention is the defining characteristic in this bout. IMHO, both sifus looked as if they were developing game plans on the spot, leading to a 'feeling out' period. However, neither fully commits to an offense, though Sifu Milan was more commited, so they never really seem to get beyond that point.

Sifu Lera seems to be waiting for the counter, which would account for his lack of aggressiveness. Maybe not. This is all just grand speculation. I think Lera keeps creating space, expanding the reaction-distance, with his kicks, perhaps to set up those quintessetial mantis hand techniques, while waiting for Milan to commit. I could also simply be that he's more comfortable fighting from the outside. He had some quick kicks.

IMHO, that's why there is hardly any demostration on Sifu Lera's part of monkey footwork or closing the gap. I don't believe he thought he would need to close the gap, but was expect Sifu Milan to do that for him.

Sifu Milan seems to want to entice Sifu Lera into an attack, but never quit gets him to bite. For example, Sifu Milan slapping at Sifu Lera's advanced arm.

I don't think Sifu Milan was really that much more aggressive than Lera, but when he tried to bait Lera it was more proactive. When you look at the moments when both exchange more than one blow apiece, you'll see that its because the baiting game has left either or both in a compromised position, which in turn leads the compromised trying to correct his predicament by fight his way out.

Okay, so if you thought that was speculating...

If I was to give my two cents (which I hear the US dollar has depreciated) I would ask the Mantis man, if he wished to play the role of a countering fighter, to use lateral and circular footwork more. Waiting shouldn't mean standing still.

I think that's the crux of the problem for Sifu Lera's intentions. His waiting caused him to stand too much in one spot. This led to a lot of small problems that turned into being thrown, getting his back turned once, and being overwhelmed at times.

Also, this kind of movement leads to openings and angles more readily than waiting directing in front of an opponent. And with a probing, baiting boxer like Sifu Milan, those moments of compromise that he produced on occasion could be exploited better, because Sifu Lera wouldn't have to right himself as well.

Mantis prowess and technique then could be used to its height.

Thanks for clip.

Mantis9

[CFT]

Originally posted by Mantis9
IMHO, that's why there is hardly any demostration on Sifu Lera's part of monkey footwork or closing the gap. I don't believe he thought he would need to close the gap, but was expect Sifu Milan to do that for him. I'm fairly new to Wing Chun; from what I've read, the Wing Chun philosophy is to close the gap but you don't always have to do it yourself .... you can wait for your opponent to do it for you! Economy of motion and all that I suppose.

I guess both masters were just waiting for the other .... you first .... no you first ... ahh, but I insist ..... not at all old chap ....

[fa_jing]

Originally posted by yu shan
This clip makes me feel that much more lucky. I mean the stuff my Shrfu teaches me, these two poor souls are clueless! Is it true they are teachers?

This post reveals that either one of those fighters would kick your ass in about 5 seconds or less.

[fa_jing]

To all: These two guys are talented teachers, but not "masters" by most people's definitions. The match was not really intended as a demo-- if so, many more takes would have been made. This is the first time that these two fellows are sparring, under indeterminate rules, so that's why you see them feeling each other out so much. This was simply a friendly meeting of two martial artists for the sake of experiencing the other's style, and my sifu recorded it for posterity's sake. I am sharing it because I think it came out pretty well and for the learning experience that it provides to all of us. It is important that we understand that the ideal we practice is not easy to implement against an opponent of similar talents. Like my own sifu says, "always remember your most basic techniques. Your punches and your kicks." (in our case, for a wrestler this would be something else)

The one time that I saw Sifu Lera turn his back, I believe he had landed a side kick but pulled it.

Incidentally Sifu Lera runs a school here in Chicago and Sifu Milan was or is a guest instructor at the school, offering Wing Chun classes.

[baldmantiz]

i fall into the trap of becoming just a defensive type fighter when i would spar so i can understand the lack of aggression from the mantis practitioner. just a quick comment on the leg-trapping...one thing i would have liked to see the mantis practitioner just step forward into the wing chun practioner after he trapped his kick, along with pulling the wc practitioner off balance into the low kicks

[Shadowboxer]

I would also like to add that I edited the video for fa-jing and at the end of the video Sifu Lera says he was working only on conditioning. Several times throughout the video Lera asks Milan if he is OK. He later tells him that he asked because he (Lera) throws alot of cheap shots. I edited most of that out. So, perhaps that will help you understand this video better as far as them feeling each other out and "intentions".

[18elders]

Can you show the complete video?
I still don't think there was any great execution of techniques but that is my opinion.

[Ren Blade]

Originally posted by 18elders
Can you show the complete video?
I still don't think there was any great execution of techniques but that is my opinion.
I feel the same.

[Shadowboxer]

I could if fa-jing sent the original tape back to me. Let me assure you I left in the good stuff. You can hear Lera ask if Milan is OK (about 2:02) but I cross faded the audio, so you don't hear all of the other times. What I edited out is more of the "feeling out" and other breaks in the action. Does that make sense? I edited only for download/streaming considerations, meaning file size. The meat of the session is still there.

[Chinwoo-er]

To be honest, I won't even consider it as a mantis vs wing chun fight.

At most I can see it as kickboxing with around 10% of Wing Chun/ Mantis techniques.

However, seeing it from a kickboxing point of view. it was quite nice cause speed, time and execution were actually rather impressive in some areas.

[fa_jing]

I think some of you are not used to seeing sparring sessions on tape. In fact I think that some of you are not used to sparring.

Neither one of these fighters has trained kickboxing. Sifu Lera did do some TKD many years back. But I didn't see any TKD in the clip.

The reason it looks that way is that

A. They are not trying to kill each other

B. When you spar, you spend part of the time working on making your stuff work, and you spend part of the time feeling the opponent out and learning about his moves. Generic punching and kicking and moving around is good for this, although I didn't see too much of that, just a little.

I didn't see any kickboxing. I did see sparring though. What clip are you guys watching? Seriously if you are unwilling to acknowledge the talents of these two individuals, you live in a paper tiger world of your own design.

Please post any of your free-sparring clips that look much better than this and have a clearer demonstration of Mantis techniques. The demo from Korea does not count as it is staged. Mantis vs. another style in a free format would be the most convincing.

The clip I offered up not so much for being a great demo, but because there is literally nothing else out there and that's why y'all are running around with your misconceptions about fighting in the real world.

to Chinwoo-er: your observation was complimentary - but I differ with you about the kickboxing characterization. First of all

"speed, time and execution" are very much a part of Wing Chun and NPM. All of the drilling that is done should be towards these ends as well as technique.

2nd: where is the kickboxing? Where is the jab? Where are the boxing combos? Where is the leg kick followed by a rear cross?

"kicking and punching" does not make it kickboxing. It makes it a striking art.

[YongChun]

I am a Wing Chun practitioner but have also trained Karate, Hung style and Tai Chi. I asked some experienced Wing Chun people what they thought about the clips and for the most part the comments were similar like "where is the Wing Chun?, Where is the Preying Mantis?" Sometimes these comments do come from people who have not sparred that much against other styles. Often they are used to classroom techniques which are very stylistic and look good. Wing Chun people have found out through many losses that classroom Chi sau practice just doesn't translate to tournament and free sparring skills. So this may account for some of the "Where's the Wing Chun?" However every lineage, teacher and student is different so there may be some who could pull off a free style sparring match and have it look like someone's ideal for the art.

One person who had seen a lot of the Wing Chun fights in Hong Kong said that the fights he saw were really not that different from the clip in this forum. He said free style sparring was really not emphasized at all. Perhaps Chi sau gives sort of a comfort level and is a very organized known entitiy whereas freestyle sparring brings a lot of uncertainty into the equation where contact reflexes developed by Chi sau play a mimimum role.

I remember using my Karate background to spar with a person doing Hung style. This person was very fast and did beautiful Hung style routines that were very fast ,powerful and precise. He wouldn't take second place to Jet Li in his execution. However in a sparring match, a lot of that went out the window and a low percentage of what he performed in the forms coild be applied. The entry against a good kicker with mobility is not easy. Many Kung Fu people have found that out against the Thai's.

In sparring I think it is not easy to have execution that looks like movie fighting or doing form work. Perhaps that is a fantasy.

Once we had a Wing Chun seminar with two top students from the late Grandmaster Yip Man. At least one had a very good reputation for real fighting. The other was very good at technical Wing Chun. One lady asked the two to spar. She expected something like she would see in a Kung Fu movie but the result was not that impressive. In fact it looked worse than the students playing around at our club. Then the one teacher explained that with two equal player's the results will look like that. So when we see Olympic Judo for example, sometimes or maybe often it looks very messy. Only when a high ranking player plays with an amateur will you see the very nice spectacular by the book throws. The rest often looks like a school boy tug of war, half executed techniques, a mistake an messy sweep and then some struggling on the ground and finally a choke out.

In the early Ultimate fighting competitions there were various competitors who said they were from TaeKwonDo or one was a tenth degree black belt in something but none of that showed up in the fights.

A long time ago there was a famous fight between a White crane master and a u style Tai Chi master. The fight just looked like wild flailing of arms and a few simple front kicks. Eventually the fight was declared as a draw. Boxing sometimes looks very clean but other times also can look like a mess with numerous clinches happening. I think in actual sparring with hard low Thai stryle kicks thrown in, it is not easy to make a nice clean safe entry and then perform a beautiful technique as is taught in a form or some drill. Against a lower level practitioner beautiful movie style techniques from any style can be made to work. But against an opponent who can match your skills, timing, speed etc., such clean execution is very difficult. I talked with a fencing coach once and he said even the top guy get hit all the time but they just are able to score a higher percentage of the time.

This clip just shows two people working on their distancing and timing in a light sparring session. Maybe it's the first time they played together and it's nice to see such friendly matches. I think if they played more and also played in a learning environment where each side was allowed to practice their ideal techeniques then slowly over time the fight might look different. But then against a strange new opponent the fight might look the same again.

This tape can maybe be some standard and hopefully someone can give a clip of Preying Mantis vs Wing Chun that does meet everyone's expectations. I would like to see that also. Until then I have to be happy that someone offered any clip and other than that watch other martial artists fight or keep enjoying my Kung Fu movies.

[fa_jing]

Question: did it occur to you who criticize that each practicioner was playing AWAY from the other's strength? Specifically, they did not want to bridge and engage the other's arms. A wise and cautious approach, given the trapping skills of both WC and NPM.

Sometimes we as complex two handed-arts go up against someone who won't give us the bridge...and find ourselves lost. For this reason, my own sifu never comes at us in sparring like a Wing Chun man with his hands extended out in front - he feels we have enough ideas to deal with such a fighter from our drilling. What we need to do is learn to punch accurately enough to deal with a slippery fighter who tends to evade rather than block.

[fa_jing]

YongChun - great post. Lots of good stuff but the Judo analogy is perfect.

[B.Tunks]

Fajing wrote:


Originally posted by fa_jing
Sometimes we as complex two handed-arts go up against someone who won't give us the bridge...and find ourselves lost. For this reason, my own sifu never comes at us in sparring like a Wing Chun man with his hands extended out in front - he feels we have enough ideas to deal with such a fighter from our drilling. What we need to do is learn to punch accurately enough to deal with a slippery fighter who tends to evade rather than block. [/B]

True words. A lot of people just dont know what it's like to fight outside the style and especially against fighters who just dont give out their limbs. It's a different kettle of fish with unknown quantities. In my opinion its always good to fight against boxers when ever the chance arises (and not to kick while your at it).
A lot of Traditional chinese martial arts relies on reaction to an extended guard which is why it's good to have the experience to deal with those who dont use it. Another major difference is the lack of straight punches thrown by most fighters. Many make the mistake of training to neutralise and respond predominantly to straight strikes which are in fact in the minority in actual fights.
Tanglang certainly does address this and has the necesary tools in its arsenal but in my experience it seems widely neglected.
The fact is, in reality you will probably never fight a mantis boxer (outside of training) but you will most likely fight someone with a rough approximation of boxing or kickboxing skills.

O.K , I went a bit off track there...

[German Bai Lung]

First of all: the post of Mantis 108 (now in the other thread!) is one of the hard but true one! And yes, maybe I was too polite to write down my opinion!
I confirm with 108 that it is a serious situation for the mantis community. And we have to work hard, not to get in a only sporting competition situation with our art!

@ Brandon: yes, it is an absolute advantage to spare with non mantis practioners, but: why not use kicks in a fight with boxers?
You have to check out, what will work best if you face a guy dealing with totally different moves and fighting theories! So, I will use a kick to see did it work or not, like I use grabbling to see if the boxer can handle that or will he be faster.
I spare sometimes with a amateur boxer and the straight punches were no problem. But the kicks were a problem for him .. ;) okay, when he punch me, he punches hard ...

For the video: I didn´t understand, why doesn´t the mantis practioner grab not ONE time? he got a whole bunch of opportunities to do so!
It was a nice but only a very friendly training video!
I look forward for Mantis108 videos! :)

[Mantis9]

I would just like you to know that Sifu Lera and Milan have my thanks for putting themselves on display and (inadvertant or not) opening themselves to criticism.

I know that this footage has help influence my 'live' training for the better. As well as the comments that it has solicited.

For myself, my opinion of the session can be readily dismissed b/c (like I hope I made clear in my first post) I don't know the context for these two sifus crossing hands, etc.

To be fair, perhaps, I should post myself sparring to get everyone's feedback. This kind of openness, though it can bring out the trollers, could very beneficial to everyone.

Mantis9

[fa_jing]

"For the video: I didn´t understand, why doesn´t the mantis practioner grab not ONE time? "

I saw SIX grabs by Sifu Lera. Again, are we watching the same clip? During what other time in the clip did you think he should have grabbed the other guy? Do you mean that he should have tried to grab the Wing Chun practicioners' forearms out of thin air? I certainly hope not.

re: "lack of aggression" I think that shows great control. As I stated in another thread, there are two principles that govern any type of sparring:

1. Don't get seriously hurt

2. Learn.

These two conditions were definitely met.

"Practice some techniques" goes under the "Learn" catagory.

"look like you are practicing your style to critics," unfortunately does not make the list.

I have more to say on Mantis vs. Kickboxing, but I'll post in the other thread.

[B.Tunks]

[QUOTE][i]@ Brandon: yes, it is an absolute advantage to spare with non mantis practioners, but: why not use kicks in a fight with boxers?
You have to check out, what will work best if you face a guy dealing with totally different moves and fighting theories!


Bai Long.

You are right. It is a good idea to use kicks against the boxer but I believe sometimes it can really help to develop your other skills when you purposely restrict yourself. It can be a good experience, just as sparring with absolutely no hands, or other restrictions can be.

you also wrote:

For the video: I didn´t understand, why doesn´t the mantis practioner grab not ONE time? he got a whole bunch of opportunities to do so!

Although I really dont want to pass judgement on these guys (let he who is without sin...), I think I agree with you on this if what you meant was; that there is no Gou Lou or Cai in this footage.

B.T

[Ren Blade]

Even though there was no sparring pads so full contact is not done for obvious reasons, they could still engaged each other more. Get inside and stick/trap/seal. All traditional CMA should have this ability. Take a risk of being hit. But sparring gear with full contact would definitely allow us to see more of their abilities. I would like to see how they do again but with sparring gear/padding at full contact.

[fa_jing]

I agree that the sparring format could have been better -- but considering that this is the first or second time these gentlemen have sparred, and they come from different styles, training methodology and different continents even .... that it came out well enough which is why I decided to share.

[isol8d]

Thanks for sharing, I enjoyed watching the clip.

[Michael Dasargo]

Let me apologize in advance if I offend anyone with my insight.

The video presented is NOT Mantis vs. Wing Chun.

The video presented represents two individuals evaluating their own level of martial skills and experience.

In no way can a set of principals compete against another.

These two individuals have gathered the courage to challenge themselves by breaking out of their own comfort zone by playing hands with another indivual who has been socialized to different patterns of movement. Extraneuous variables such as vision, health conditions, experience, mental conditions, etc., make it impossible to ultimately pit the efficiency of one system versus another.

The principals and techniques we learn our tools for us to master, not for us to be slave to. Jon Funks most recent article epitomizes that point.

As Adam Hsu once wrote, "It's not the song, it's the singer".

Study Damo's Bloodstream Sermon...not the paths of others. It is only when we understand our own nature, can we truly understand.

M

[mantisben]

Originally posted by Michael Dasargo

...
Extraneuous variables such as vision, health conditions, experience, mental conditions, etc., make it impossible to ultimately pit the efficiency of one system versus another.

The principals and techniques we learn our tools for us to master, not for us to be slave to. Jon Funks most recent article epitomizes that point.

As Adam Hsu once wrote, "It's not the song, it's the singer".
...


Excellent! I would like to add... Well, I have nothing to add to what you said. You hit the nail right on the head!

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by German Bai Lung

And we have to work hard, not to get in a only sporting competition situation with our art!

why?

[German Bai Lung]

You ask why we have to work hard or why not get in an only sporting competition?

For the ONLY sporting competition:

we surely will lose a lot of the art if we does! E.g.: why train techniques to the groin? Why strikes to the eyes, to the larynx? Why Chin Na at generell? It is forbidden on every sporting competition! So we will lose nearly half of our art. First only in the applications later than in the whole system!

Sporting competition is good to train TOGETHER with a lot of other stuff.

My opinion!

[SevenStar]

Do you currently do full contact shots to the groin? what about a full contact eye gouge? Have you ever really broken a limb during drills?

those are things you work while drilling. you punch, kick, palm, etc, correct? then there is no reason why you couldn't compete sportively. You wouldn't be losing anything. in bjj, I don't actually break limbs -that's what tapping is for - but I know that option is there. I don't throw elbows to the head, even though I train muay thai - but I know that option is there.

if you understand the principles behind what you are doing, IMO you can apply it to whatever rules you may encounter. as stated before, I train thai boxing. When I fight american rules kickboxing, I can't leg kick, can't knee, can't elbow... all of the things I love and train to do. That doesn't stop me though.

In bjj, heel hooks are illegal. doesn't mean we don't learn them.
In judo, leg locks, spine locks and strikes are illegal, but yet we still learn them.

[Tainan Mantis]

Sevenstar,
Interesting points on principles.
I spend a lot of time on the throat lock.
To make it work well it is a little slower than throwing a punch.
I have thought that this training, while useful to me, wouldn't help much in a competition.

In fact, if I did train to win competitions, I would not train this technique so much.

So, for someone like German or Mantisben, I think that is what they mean.

On the other hand, competition is a superb place to fight someone who is skilled and trying to knock you unconsciuos or causing you to submit.

So, it seems that trad MArtist should have a time devoted to one aspect and a time devoted to another.

Because a trad MArtist who has not been in a situation where they are in danger of getting beat up, IMO will always have doubt of themself of what they will do under pressure.

Musashi said that until you have fought in a death match you haven't become a warrior, so I guess it is all a difference of degree.

[mantis108]

First off, I agreed that Seven Star has a point. But you are at the same time narrowing it down to a limited view of what CMA styles should be. I don't think it is accurate to view what CMA do in the light of MMA or vice versa. I must say that I agree with both GBL and Tainan.

BTW, indulge me to share a story with you. One of my student, who loves what she's learning and praticing in Kung Fu with me, told me that she will have to stop Kung Fu for 3 months for the reason that her Karate Club has offered to put her into intensive training for competition (Kata). Their club has the funding, from the government, to hire an outside source sports trainer, whom I suspect knows nothing really about the arts, to design a training program for her and her team mates. The condition (pun intended) is to not do anything other than the program and Karate. Of course, I will have to say please by all means if that's going to help you achieve your goal. I respect their club's efforts and good intention towards their members but at the same time what exactly are they trying to achieve with an outside source program? What happen to the exsiting training program (assuming that it is traditionally handed down since the creation of the art)? The really interesting thing is that the student is and will still be doing the normal curriculum during class and no special attention is dealt to the competition program (both conditioning and Kata). In both their higher ups competition people and the students' preceptions this is counter productive. So now because of the competition the student is stressed because deep down there is the need for the real art (both for Kung Fu and Karate) but there is also the desire for getting something out of the sport competition (the Kata that performs well).

Enough for the rant. I will let you think about the situation.

Having the somewhat art Vs sport politics out of the way, I think the more important issue of system integrity (what is that you do?) and identity crisis (why do you do what you do?) needs to be addressed in another other thread.

Mantis108

[SevenStar]

I agree wholeheartedly that it limits you, just as fighting american rules limits me. What I was saying is you should be able to compensate for the limitation. To quote Tainan:

"Because a trad MArtist who has not been in a situation where they are in danger of getting beat up, IMO will always have doubt of themself of what they will do under pressure.

Musashi said that until you have fought in a death match you haven't become a warrior, so I guess it is all a difference of degree."

and he's right. However, in this day and age you can't do eye gouges, groin shots, etc. at full speed be it training or competition. That's where IMO understanding of principle comes in. I don't buy into the myth that a style is "too deadly" to compete with. For example, shuai chiao has a principle called shearing. In a nutshell, shearing is applying to opposite forces to the body simultaneously, for example pushing your torso and pulling your leg.

Now, take that principle and apply it. As you are stepping forward, I sweep your leg and push backwards. It looks like this:

http://www.judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/kouchigari.htm

WAIT A MINUTE!!! That's a judo throw in the image, not a shuai chiao throw!!

Now, let's apply it in a nastier way - as I step in, I block/push in on your leg with either my leg or arm. The other arm performs a chop, downward/diagonally into your neck.

There's a throw I've seen mantis guys use, where from beside/diagonally behind the guy you will sweep his leg out while you strike him in the chest, knocking him back... same principle.

That's how I think - I try to fit everything into the construct of a principle. Once I understand that principle I can make applications as I see fit.

an arcing horizontal strike can be a hook, elbow, etc. That's what I see when I fight. If I happen to get into a street fight, does it matter if I use an elbow or a hook? not at all. If it lands properly, they both produce a similar result.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by mantis108
Their club has the funding, from the government, to hire an outside source sports trainer, whom I suspect knows nothing really about the arts, to design a training program for her and her team mates. The condition (pun intended) is to not do anything other than the program and Karate. Of course, I will have to say please by all means if that's going to help you achieve your goal. I respect their club's efforts and good intention towards their members but at the same time what exactly are they trying to achieve with an outside source program? What happen to the exsiting training program (assuming that it is traditionally handed down since the creation of the art)? The really interesting thing is that the student is and will still be doing the normal curriculum during class and no special attention is dealt to the competition program (both conditioning and Kata).

Most likely, you are right - they don't know about the arts - and they don't have to. My guess is that their job is that of fitness specialist - they are going to get the competitors into competition shape. Take a boxing trainer for example. He may not box, BUT he knows the sport, the training and has trained fighters before. Consequently, he knows how to get you into the shape you need to be in to be at the top of your game. These trainers are going to whip the students into shape. MA alone isn't really an optimal way to get into shape. it's the conditioning that does that... running two miles every day, hitting the gym several days per week, bodyweight exercises, proper diet, etc. specialists know more about this facet of training than alot of MA instructors do, and quite naturally, because it's their speciality. The traditional program doesn't have to change. Your student may be lifting weights and running, but that doesn't mean that she can't do stance training.

Second, you mentioned a training program that may have been around since the inception of the art... That, IMO can be good and bad. Stance training is an example. It doesn't really build leg strength - it builds leg endurance. There are MUCH more efficient ways to build leg strength than to try and rely on stance training. Keep it in the art - you must have solid structure - but don't think you're gonna have super powerful legs only through stance training.

In both their higher ups competition people and the students' preceptions this is counter productive. So now because of the competition the student is stressed because deep down there is the need for the real art (both for Kung Fu and Karate) but there is also the desire for getting something out of the sport competition (the Kata that performs well).

Don't stress - let them train. If the program is any good, it's likely that they will be in the best shape of their lives.

[mantis108]

That's how I think - I try to fit everything into the construct of a principle. Once I understand that principle I can make applications as I see fit.

That's nothing inheritly wrong with this rationale especially in a self taught environment. However, this may not be the suitable approach to traditional CMA. BTW, I don't buy in the myth of deadly style can't be sparring neither. If you are not learning a TCMA, that's not problem at all. Openning a MA magazine today you will find almost all applications that shown are the same to the point that it's boring. This is what the principle base rationale brings. On the one hand, it makes styles more compatible. On the other hand, it makes styles lose their identity, which may or may not be of concern. Another problem is that it circumvents the checks and blocks there are intended for the TCMA stylists to overcome leading the student to think that he/she knows it all in a relative short time. The journey and the experience of TCMA would not be the same any more. In truth, had the students really got it, especially what the style stands for? Do they have a good graspe at what is the relationship between training and applying what they have been taught? This particularly applies to mantis' ling form training. Although the ling form training is controversal, it is an acknowledged training methodology in mantis training, which in my mind effectively train the mind-body continuum. The normal reaction to ling form training from a principle base rationale POV would view the training illogical at times. But as the teacher points out the wisdom behind it then it is clear that it is another check and block that is designed to help the student to overcome applying the principle base rationale, which is quite one dimensional IMHO. In other words, one of the goals of TCMA is not to blinde side ourselves by following one dimensional thought pattern when dealing with TCMA training process.

I don't feel stress myself. Because I know my journey and I don't have the need to look elsewhere unlike the case this particular karate club is doing. But it is their journey not mine.

Anyway, We shall see the result.

Regards

Mantis108

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by mantis108


That's nothing inheritly wrong with this rationale especially in a self taught environment. However, this may not be the suitable approach to traditional CMA.

Shuai chiao is a traditional CMA, and it takes this approach. Why would it differ for other styles?

Openning a MA magazine today you will find almost all applications that shown are the same to the point that it's boring. This is what the principle base rationale brings. On the one hand, it makes styles more compatible. On the other hand, it makes styles lose their identity, which may or may not be of concern.

I can see your point there, however A style will not lose it's identity. principles are common things, but they don't change the essence of the style. look at the examples I showed. Also, the shearing principle is present in wing chun. will it look the exact same? heck no, because the principle is fitting within the style that is applying it. In addition to that, there are other obvious things, like footwork. My judo/sc and muay thai footwork will never look like my longfist footwork, and none of those will ever look like mantis footwork. Also, there will always be the individual style within the core style. muay thai is muay thai, however, I may prefer knees and the rear leg roundhouse, whereas my coach may prefer elbows and the front leg roundhouse.

Another problem is that it circumvents the checks and blocks there are intended for the TCMA stylists to overcome leading the student to think that he/she knows it all in a relative short time.

how? With a structured curriculum, this should not be the case.

In other words, one of the goals of TCMA is not to blinde side ourselves by following one dimensional thought pattern when dealing with TCMA training process.

I don't see how it's one dimensional. IMO, what's more one dimensional is teaching set applications for techniques. It doesn't encourage a lateral thought process. For example, you may have a sifu who teaches grabbing a strike and pulling your opponent into a strike of your own as the only application of "shoot the bow" The student may get in the habit of only using/seeing that application and never even begin to think that maybe that technique could be a fireman's carry... When you understand a principle, what you can do with it is limitless.

I don't feel stress myself. Because I know my journey and I don't have the need to look elsewhere unlike the case this particular karate club is doing. But it is their journey not mine.

Anyway, We shall see the result.

I apologize, that was a miscommunication on my part. I meant to say that the student shouldn't stress about it.

[Michael Dasargo]

You train the way you fight, and you WILL fight the way you train.

People train for various reasons...sport, hobby, survival...etc.

Follow your nature. An individuals concern should be their own personal development...which ever path that may be.

Live and let live.
M

[SevenStar]

you're very right. you will fight how you train. that's why I like the principle thought process. There are aother factors in that saying to though. You may train to hit lethal pressure points and such, but never train it against a fully resisting opponent, or never get used to dealing with full contact shots, in which case you just lessened your chances of winning. (not talking about mantis - just an example)

Also, I've seen some karate guys in my day who were used to only light contact sparring. When they got into fights, they were just tapping at their opponents and they (the karate guys) got mauled.

[mantis108]

Hi Sevenstar,

Nice rebuttal. :)

<<<Shuai chiao is a traditional CMA, and it takes this approach. Why would it differ for other styles?>>>

Shuai Chiao IMHO uses as different training protocol than other more common styles of Kung Fu. It is not that it is not traditional. It is just that it's approach is different. As far as I understand it, it is one of the styles that doesn't claim to have ties with Shaolin. There are basically 2 protocols or approaches to TCMA, one is short strike protocols (SSP), which is what Shuai Chiao is. The other is long fist protocols (LFP), which Shaolin styles over time adopted as the major training protocols. SSP doesn't rely on long routines (forms) while LFP is heavily into forms. Shuai Chiao being a SSP style relies heavily on principles instead. The use of routines/forms in TCMA IMHO has its ritualist root in Kalaripayattu, which is also considered as an ancient temple art originated in southwestern India and brought to China by Bodhidharma. In a sense, practicing forms is like reciting sutra, it helps to promote and concentrate devotion (as a form of love), which is one of the the main ingredients for building a style.

For reasons unknown (I could speculate but not at this time), LFP became the more popular method and gained dominance in spreading MA through out China, then Japan and the rest of the world. I would say the popularity comes from LFP appeals to a broad demographic base. SSP is demanding and strenous, which is not necessary everyone's cup of tea. Not that LFP isn't hardcore, but it has a versatility that SSP doesn't have. The truth is even scholars [re: bookworms, nerds] could appreciate forms. ;) and they are the ones who write about things so that glories could be retold and myths are spreaded far and wide in all eternalty. lol...

So there is a notable difference as we compare styles and approaches. It would not be accurate IMHO to generalize on TCMA by grouping them as one group of MA. We have to be aware of the diversity of TCMA.

<<<I can see your point there, however A style will not lose it's identity. principles are common things, but they don't change the essence of the style. look at the examples I showed. Also, the shearing principle is present in wing chun. will it look the exact same? heck no, because the principle is fitting within the style that is applying it. In addition to that, there are other obvious things, like footwork. My judo/sc and muay thai footwork will never look like my longfist footwork, and none of those will ever look like mantis footwork. Also, there will always be the individual style within the core style. muay thai is muay thai, however, I may prefer knees and the rear leg roundhouse, whereas my coach may prefer elbows and the front leg roundhouse.>>>

I think that is a need to discern system and style. If principles transcend systems and styles, why are we having so many systems and even more styles?

<<<how? With a structured curriculum, this should not be the case.>>>

The way I see it, structured curriculum is like a skeleton. You will need the muscularture to move the skeleton. Without the muscularture, the checks and blocks that students go through, the skeleton is just a pile of bones.

<<<I don't see how it's one dimensional. IMO, what's more one dimensional is teaching set applications for techniques. It doesn't encourage a lateral thought process. For example, you may have a sifu who teaches grabbing a strike and pulling your opponent into a strike of your own as the only application of "shoot the bow" The student may get in the habit of only using/seeing that application and never even begin to think that maybe that technique could be a fireman's carry... When you understand a principle, what you can do with it is limitless.>>>

You have a point. but... In the example that you gave, I would say that it would not be the teacher's fault. The teacher did his job by teaching what the "principle" outlined as permitted within the construct of the system and/or style. It's a guideline. He definitely has the right to reserve furthering the guideline. This will bring us to the issue of the integrity of the system and of the teacher. I think that issue deserves another thread. It is nothing worse to me than a student needs me to spoon fed him/her. I don't think you can make a good figther out of a spoon fed automaton. Personally, I don't blame it on others for not seeing further. It is my solemn duty as a human being to expand and explore new grounds (within reason of course). If the teacher is a true guiding light the need for me to exlpore on my own is minimal. I will be more than happy to follow him til the very end. But I also needs to be responsible for my choices and not to blame it on others for my concious choices.

<<<I apologize, that was a miscommunication on my part. I meant to say that the student shouldn't stress about it.>>>

No offence taken, my friend, no need for apologies. :)

Regards

Mantis108

[Michael Dasargo]

There are aother factors in that saying to though. You may train to hit lethal pressure points and such, but never train it against a fully resisting opponent, or never get used to dealing with full contact shots, in which case you just lessened your chances of winning. (not talking about mantis - just an example)

Also, I've seen some karate guys in my day who were used to only light contact sparring. When they got into fights, they were just tapping at their opponents and they (the karate guys) got mauled. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree. Hence the statement:

You train the way you fight, and you will fight the WAY YOU TRAIN.

M

[darksands]

I didnt see any Peach Stealing!!!

[mantisben]

The Shaolin Monks had a reputation for being excellent fighters. Did they do full-contact sparring with their fellow monks?

[Tieh]

:D Did they?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by mantis108

Shuai Chiao IMHO uses as different training protocol than other more common styles of Kung Fu. It is not that it is not traditional. It is just that it's approach is different. As far as I understand it, it is one of the styles that doesn't claim to have ties with Shaolin. There are basically 2 protocols or approaches to TCMA, one is short strike protocols (SSP), which is what Shuai Chiao is. The other is long fist protocols (LFP), which Shaolin styles over time adopted as the major training protocols. SSP doesn't rely on long routines (forms) while LFP is heavily into forms. Shuai Chiao being a SSP style relies heavily on principles instead. The use of routines/forms in TCMA IMHO has its ritualist root in Kalaripayattu, which is also considered as an ancient temple art originated in southwestern India and brought to China by Bodhidharma. In a sense, practicing forms is like reciting sutra, it helps to promote and concentrate devotion (as a form of love), which is one of the the main ingredients for building a style.

For reasons unknown (I could speculate but not at this time), LFP became the more popular method and gained dominance in spreading MA through out China, then Japan and the rest of the world. I would say the popularity comes from LFP appeals to a broad demographic base. SSP is demanding and strenous, which is not necessary everyone's cup of tea. Not that LFP isn't hardcore, but it has a versatility that SSP doesn't have. The truth is even scholars [re: bookworms, nerds] could appreciate forms. ;) and they are the ones who write about things so that glories could be retold and myths are spreaded far and wide in all eternalty. lol...

So there is a notable difference as we compare styles and approaches. It would not be accurate IMHO to generalize on TCMA by grouping them as one group of MA. We have to be aware of the diversity of TCMA.

Very informative, I did not know that. Thanks!

I think that is a need to discern system and style. If principles transcend systems and styles, why are we having so many systems and even more styles?

because we are human and have individual thoughts, rather than collective. there are only so many principles, but as the shearing example showed, different people interpret it in different ways. Hence, several systems and styles. At the root, however, shearing is still shearing.

The way I see it, structured curriculum is like a skeleton. You will need the muscularture to move the skeleton. Without the muscularture, the checks and blocks that students go through, the skeleton is just a pile of bones.

I agree with that. I'm not so sure that a lack of those checks and blocks will cause the student to prematurely think he knows it all though.


You have a point. but... In the example that you gave, I would say that it would not be the teacher's fault. The teacher did his job by teaching what the "principle" outlined as permitted within the construct of the system and/or style. It's a guideline. He definitely has the right to reserve furthering the guideline. This will bring us to the issue of the integrity of the system and of the teacher. I think that issue deserves another thread. It is nothing worse to me than a student needs me to spoon fed him/her. I don't think you can make a good figther out of a spoon fed automaton. Personally, I don't blame it on others for not seeing further. It is my solemn duty as a human being to expand and explore new grounds (within reason of course). If the teacher is a true guiding light the need for me to exlpore on my own is minimal. I will be more than happy to follow him til the very end. But I also needs to be responsible for my choices and not to blame it on others for my concious choices.

nicely put.

[/B]

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by mantisben
The Shaolin Monks had a reputation for being excellent fighters. Did they do full-contact sparring with their fellow monks?

It really doesn't matter, either way.

1. training then was WAY different from what you are seeing in many schools today. They had more time, different mindsets, etc.

2. we really don't know what they're fighting was like. bozteppe is known for being a bruiser, but have you seen the footage of him fighting william cheung?

[mantisben]

Originally posted by SevenStar


It really doesn't matter, either way.
...

After what I've read on this very informative thread - excellent posts by knowledgable Martial Artists - if Shaolin Monks didn't do full-contact sparring, how did they become known for being such great fighters? Was it all simply propaganda meant to give credibility to some kind of "Fighting Monks of Shaolin" legend?

Although we don't know - at least I don't know - what their fighting was like, there are MANY accounts (legend, or otherwise) of how effective their fighting and training methods were.

Still, I'm curious as to what others might think, or know, of the effectiveness of the training methods (there were many) of Shaolin. Was their training geared towards effective combat, or was effective combat a by-product of their training?

I believe an appropriately trained Martial Artist can train in lethal strikes to vital points, and deliver them effectively and successfully, without actually killing another human-being. Without PROVING to the UFC-Reality-Fighting-I-Won't-Believe-It-'Til-I-SEE-Someone-Die-From-Such-A-Strike crowd. Would PROVING such a strike can be delivered be GOOD?

Nooo...

If someone PROVED IT, From what I know of human-nature (which isn't much), more people will seek training on how to kill a man with one strike, and they'd compete against one another and KILL each other for money and recognition, while Blood-Thirsty spectators paid to see it happen, place bets on who would be the victor, and cheer them on. Fight Promotors would encourage Martial Artists to continue to fight in such matches for the spectators entertainment, and their own Bank Accounts.

Sound familiar? It should...

I'd like to add that I don't any lethal strikes, train in any lethal strikes, or can even deliver an EFFECTIVE strike...

P.S.: The latter part of this post has nothing to do with the Wing-Chun/Praying-Mantis Sparring clip. My respect to both the Wing-Chun and the Praying Mantis Exponents.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by mantisben

if Shaolin Monks didn't do full-contact sparring, how did they become known for being such great fighters? Was it all simply propaganda meant to give credibility to some kind of "Fighting Monks of Shaolin" legend?

Although we don't know - at least I don't know - what their fighting was like, there are MANY accounts (legend, or otherwise) of how effective their fighting and training methods were.

I doubt anyone intentionally tried to start any legend. Unfortunately, I'm not a scholar on the history of shaolin - whom did they defeat that gave them such a reputation? Were they fighting trained exponents? exponents of their same style?
There are some people very knowledgable in this area on the shaolin forum - maybe we can pose this question there...


I believe an appropriately trained Martial Artist can train in lethal strikes to vital points, and deliver them effectively and successfully, without actually killing another human-being. Without PROVING to the UFC-Reality-Fighting-I-Won't-Believe-It-'Til-I-SEE-Someone-Die-From-Such-A-Strike crowd. Would PROVING such a strike can be delivered be GOOD?

The point isn't to prove anything to the world. I don't enter shiai and kickboxing matches to prove to the world that I can fight. I do it to test myself - to keep pushing myself. I know that if I'm going to win, I have to train hard, and the people wanting to be me are training just as hard. The thing with the above mentioned lethal strikes is that I can't be sure that I can do them in a fight. I know I can knee someone. I know I can roundhouse. I know I can throw someone. I know because I've done it several times, full contact against resisting opponents. I've never done an eye gouge under such circumstances, nor any pressure point/cavity strikes under those circumstances, and consequently I'm not sure I can pull them off effectively.


If someone PROVED IT, From what I know of human-nature (which isn't much), more people will seek training on how to kill a man with one strike

There's a japanese proverb: ichi-go ichi-e; one encounter, one chance. MA have been striving for a one punch kill since the inception of MA. And actually, I think there are alot of people that are capable of it. The problem is pulling it off against someone who doesn't want you to kill them. It's hard enough to kill someone with one bullet - they run, zig zag, hide behind things, etc. naturally it's much harder to do so with only your bare hands. If you train to have the power to do so, however, then you can still be assured that you will have the striking power to do plenty of damage when you do hit them. Training doesn't guarantee victory, one strike death, etc. - it only improves your chances.

and they'd compete against one another and KILL each other for money and recognition, while Blood-Thirsty spectators paid to see it happen, place bets on who would be the victor, and cheer them on. Fight Promotors would encourage Martial Artists to continue to fight in such matches for the spectators entertainment, and their own Bank Accounts.

nah. Eye gouging was actually allowed in the early UFCs, as well as alot of other things. In pride, you are still able to kick/knee a downed opponent.

[ironox]

I thought this was just 2 young students playing around. i was surprised to find that one or both are Sifu Level as stated in other replies. Very Little wing chun or mantis technique in this video.

[shenyingwu]

LoL, you guys like keeping your hands open like that, sometimes its fun to punch peopels hands when they're open, lol mess up their fingers lol

[JAFO]

Speaking from one (of many) Wing Chun perspective....

I know next to nothing about NPM, so I have no comment or opinion about that end of the encounter. My comments are directed entirely in reference to the efforts of the other participant.

I really saw no effort in actually seeking the bridge in an effort to control it, or working on collapsing the structure. I saw no footwork in support of structure, no real structure to support, no guarding of the centerline and maybe only one kick that shows up in any of the forms - a low side kick to the knee. I don't know of any circular roundhouse-type kicks in WC, I don't know of any footwork in any of the forms that involves bobbing and 'dancing'. There's definitely no tolerance for ducking or clinching under the armpit (breaks his own structure). I didn't see a single combination involving a trap, a Pak, a Lop against a bridge, an attack up the center or any attempts to pull the NPM guy off his center. If anything, it seems like he was trying to go around the center rather than through it. He definitely was not agressive enough in seeking simultaneous bridges or the preferred distance and it actually looks like he was avoiding them.

Note that none of the elements I noted above have anything to do with specific techniques and variances between the various WC lineages. I'm only commenting on the basic WC concepts and principles. Why train in a style if we aren't going to use it?

I guess what I mean to say is that I have seen Wing Chun 'sparring' (if you want to call it that) with similar levels of contact that actually looked like Wing Chun. I'd almost say that some of the older JKD fighters look more like WC than this. Step-drag up the center, kicking from structure, entering from the outside gate, going for the Lop (grab-n-pull), double bridges, moving from the outside gate to the inside to the outside again, sticking, etc.

This appears to me as something very different than from what I am familiar for Wing Chun. Although a sifu, perhaps he wasn't trying to do the WC thing - does he also train in something else on the side? Personally, if I were interested in this style of fighting, it seems like I'd perfer a kickboxing or Muy Thai or Sanshou regimen as they seem to do that much more cleanly, assertively, with better form, and with more coherent combinations. But that's just my opinion.

[fa_jing]

Wow. Some (some) of you have no compunction about displaying complete ignorance regarding Kung Fu, fighting, and the Martial arts. I'm in shock and amazement more and more.

JAFO:

I don't know of any circular roundhouse-type kicks in WC
If anything, it seems like he was trying to go around the center rather than through it


"Note that none of the elements I noted above have anything to do with specific techniques and variances between the various WC lineages."

You are illiterate as well as disrespectful. Go back to the first page of this thread. Sifu Milan is a Cheung - style practicioner. In the Cheung style, there are roundhouse kicks, and the practicioner strives to reach the outer gate in order to eliminate one of the opponent's weapons.


There's definitely no tolerance for ducking or clinching under the armpit (breaks his own structure).

Tell me something. Have you ever f.arted in class? Is a f.art Wing Chun?

to ironox:

I thought this was just 2 young students playing around

Apparently you've never seen two accomplished martial artists of similar ability test themselves. I have a question for you. Do you think you could take them? Either one? if not you need to


STFU

[BeiTangLang]

"Wow. Some (some) of you have no compunction about displaying complete ignorance regarding Kung Fu, fighting, and the Martial arts. I'm in shock and amazement more and more."

You have to understand that when a clip is submitted to an open forum there will be educated & uneducated posts on _all_ sides.

This is a mantis forum & when I see a person who I respect the opinion of says, "Assuming the black shirt is a NPM player", this is a clue as to the contents of the clip. (I have not viewed the clip because I wish to remain impartial & just maintain forum content).

Someone giving their opinion; ie,
"JAFO:
I don't know of any circular roundhouse-type kicks in WC
If anything, it seems like he was trying to go around the center rather than through it

"Note that none of the elements I noted above have anything to do with specific techniques and variances between the various WC lineages.""

does not warrant this reply :
"You are illiterate as well as disrespectful. Go back to the first page of this thread. Sifu Milan is a Cheung - style practicioner. In the Cheung style, there are roundhouse kicks, and the practicioner strives to reach the outer gate in order to eliminate one of the opponent's weapons."

at all.

Anyway, please stick to being respectful in your replies.
In reading JAFO's post, I see that he critiqued the techniques of both stylist (mainly the wing chun guy) based upon his own experiences & was not intentionaly insulting in his comments.
In the future, please reply in-like style.

Instead of just insulting someone for their comments, explain the WC usage of the "roundhouse type kicks" or why he "didn't see a single combination involving a trap, a Pak, a Lop against a bridge, an attack up the center or any attempts to pull the NPM guy off his center."

Anyway, best wishes from a mod trying to keep the peace.
~BTL

[fa_jing]

BTL - All this was discussed on the 1st or 2nd page. I'm not going over old material. Furthermore, it was a MANTIS practioner who requested to cross-post the link, and I did not expect him to criticize the link in that manner nor for others to jump in and do the same.

JAFO was not respectful. "I saw no footwork in support of structure, no real structure to support, no guarding of the centerline and maybe only one kick that shows up in any of the forms - a low side kick to the knee." This is insulting to the MA practicioner in question in the worst way - not to mention completely false. To say there was NO footwork in support of structure -- are you blind? This man is one of W. Cheung's top students - and I think I'll value the opinion of a Grandmaster over the opinion of "JAFO"

ironox's statement, was incredibly egregiously disrespectful. BTW, do you have any comment regarding posts like this?


Still waiting for someone to post a clip of others doing better. The clips posted by the German practicioner were fine, the students did well....but they were, of course, not at the level of these two fine SIFUs. Anyone can see that.

whoever said "Assuming the black shirt is a NPM player" is off his rocker. It was a sideways insult. Sorry that you respect the guy. Look at the clip for yourself, his mantis techniques are clear, he obviously isn't a BaGua or a Karate practicioner.

BTW, please feel free to delete this entire thread. My permission to cross-post the link was based on false premises. Or leave it up, it's funny to watch the ignorant people come out of the woodwork who think fighting is like a HK movie or a 2-person form. The disrespect is not funny, but it is worth wading through the disrespectfullness so that I can laugh at the ignorance.

[BeiTangLang]

Mantis108 did nothing but post the clip ,add constructive comments /opinions about the clip, & through his past & current posts, I can assure you that he is not "off his rocker".

If Jafo didn't see the footwork or techniques, then he didn't. No slam to him, you, or them. He just didn't see it.
Had I been on tape & no one saw my technique, I'd look at the tape & either correct it, or shrug it off to the poster not knowing what I was doing. I wouldn't call him an idiot for not knowing unless he was directly offensive (Like telling me to stfu).



Because you asked me to, I looked at the clip. I will not comment on what I saw. I do appreciate the fact these two men placed themselves online to show their interpretations of their art forms for our observation.

I also thank all that contributed their thoughts, opinions & critiques to this thread.

This thread will not be deleted, as it has good information in it if anyone cares to read through to find it. I will however lock it because it has degenerated beyond the scope of information pertaining to mantis on all sides.

Best Wishes to all,
~BTL