Fighters and Non-fighters

[YongChun]

Terrence has stated that there are fighters and non-fighters and that’s all. I tend to agree with that. However I put those who do chi sau, drills and forms in the same category as those who put on protection and spar or those who roll around on rubber mats all day long in the same category. The latter are also non-fighters but they often put themselves above the former category. They also can’t handle a fighter.

Real fighters are the professionals who fight for a living. They fight opponents whose intention is for knockout or submission. Someone getting in the ring with the likes of Tyson or whoever is good these days is a fighter. The rest are all hobbyists. I don’t know if this forum has any fighters by that kind of definition? If not then we should worry so much about semantics of who is or isn’t a fighter or whose shade of reality is more realistic. None would be fighters.

Real fighting is a totally different game and feeling. Differences are subtle and not obvious from the surface. On the surface both types of fighting look very similar. In professional fighting, you can’t afford to take as many risks. Eventually you risk some kind of permanent damage.

In Escrima, those who fight with a stick with no protection are real fighters. Maybe even the Dog brothers don’t qualify as fighters? Those who use protection and nerf padded sticks are not real fighters. Those who train with wooden knives and rubber knives are not real fighters no matter how intensively they fight. There just isn’t the same risk involved as when facing a real sharp blade.

If you want to be a real fighter then spending less than 6 hours in the gym or having an average looking body just won’t cut it in the professional world. It’s true that real fighters don’t spar full out with their training partners. They are careful and use protection. But you can’t draw the conclusion that by training like that in the identical fashion and even with those guys will put you in the same distinguished category. It’s the same as people who are very proud of the masters that taught them and feel elevated above those people who don’t have as good a teacher.

Professionals put themselves at risk and play for as real as is acceptable under the law. That’s a big difference. Indeed there are two categories of martial artists those who fight and those who don’t. Fighters are the professionals who do that as a living. If you don’t do that, then the rest of the talk about the reality of fighting is just hot air.

Most classical martial arts clubs are not set up to train fighters who would fights for a living. Few teachers have that experience and furthermore to make a living they have to cater to a wide variety of students. If trying to cater to the fighters then 90% of their bread and butter students would quit the training. So that’s another practical concern. In my mind, the usefulness of classical martial arts is not judged by how many professional fighters it produces. Of course if some art produces a world-class professional fighter then the natural human tendency is to brag about one’s great art.

The above is not meant as a set in concrete viewpoint but just as a topic to be discussed.

[old jong]

I agree ,most "fighters" are really "sparrers" with a forum attitude.

Hey!, I spar!...;) :D

[Ernie]

there are [ fighters ]
there are people that [ play ] hard
there are people that just train
and there are killers

I have trained with fighters and killers

I know I am not a fighter , I have felt their power and ability
I’m not on that level very few people are

personally I’m more intrigued by killers
I have seen martial arts as killing arts
not playing arts

in looking at yourself and how you train you must be honest with your goal
my goal is simple to kill ,maim , and incapacitate some one who threatens my health

thus my goal would be to focus on that aspect of training and seek the most efficient method of reaching that goal in my imaginary mind since I have yet to kill some one =)

some are competitive and have that drive they become fighters and they train to fight fighters
others are competitive but lack the drive to train , they just play hard


other’s just like to be part of something fighting and application tack a back seat , hanging out reading books training light a nice slow path to self discovery using martial arts as the vehicle

your goals will dictate your interest , first step is being honest with yourself
and accepting that not everyone will have the same goal as you

[Vajramusti]

Ernie-
the law has become a silent 3rd, 4th, x th party in many interactions in some key parts of the world.
Winning and losing have become quite contextual and relative terms.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
Ernie-
the law has become a silent 3rd, 4th, x th party in many interactions in some key parts of the world.
Winning and losing have become quite contextual and relative terms.

Joy ,
This is were self honesty comes in , when you are forced to fight , there is no room for the law , or what your wife will think or what ever , you must make up your mind and follow through , with that knowledge one must avoid this confrontation realizing the consequences . like having a loaded gun with you art all times you don’t pull it out just because .

I noticed this as I learned more about martial arts I was not drawn at all to the sub mission aspects , or health aspects , or history none of those things just the raw honesty of application in it’s most brutal form [ I’m sick like that ] but I know this about myself , just like I know I have no desire to be a competitive fighter though I train at that levels sometimes

Just individual goals

As you put [ mileage may vary ]
;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

"However I put those who do chi sau, drills and forms in the same category as those who put on protection and spar or those who roll around on rubber mats all day long in the same category."

Chi sao, drills, and forms ...in the same category as sparring with protective gear (and presumably hard contact)...???

The same category?

I don't think so....have been in both camps...and the latter camp comes much closer to reality fighting than the first.

Comparing the protective equipment hard sparrers/grapplers to professional fighters and coming to the conclusion that the latter are the "real fighters" - while technically true...

doesn't change the fact that the protective equipment hard sparrers/grapplers come closer to the "real fighters" than those who just do chi sao, drills, and forms.

Because the intensity and the danger involved is not the same - as well as the fact that the fighting scenarios covered in chi sao, drills, and forms are not as close to reality fighting as the hard sparrers/grapplers scenarios.

[Vajramusti]

Not to worry Ernie- I have a good sense of my priorities.

I am not advocating freezing or losing.

[Knifefighter]

Most "professional" fighters cannot make a living from what they get paid for fighting and they have other "day jobs".

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Terrence has stated that there are fighters and non-fighters and that’s all. I tend to agree with that. However I put those who do chi sau, drills and forms in the same category as those who put on protection and spar or those who roll around on rubber mats all day long in the same category. The latter are also non-fighters but they often put themselves above the former category. They also can’t handle a fighter.

**For me, the definition of a "fighter" is the same as for "martial artist" -- one who gets into a fighting environment (like a swimmer is someone who gets in the water). That environment is characterized by an extremely high intensity, genuine resistance, and an intent to "crush", pound, defeat, overwhelm, etc. the opponent. Boxers who get into the ring -- regardless of whether they get paid for it -- are fighters; muay thai practitioners that get into the ring -- regardless of whether they get paid for it -- are fighters; BJJ or wrestlers who get out on the mats and roll -- regardless of whether they get paid for it -- are fighters. WCK people that do only forms and drills, including chi sao, are not fighters (any more than folks that do boxing drills but never get into the ring aren't fighters).

Real fighters are the professionals who fight for a living. They fight opponents whose intention is for knockout or submission.
Someone getting in the ring with the likes of Tyson or whoever is good these days is a fighter. The rest are all hobbyists.

**You separate folks into those that fight for a living and those that don't -- which is just an excuse or rationale for why folks don't fight as part of their training (since they don't intend to be a pro, there is no point). Besides being lame, it overlooks the whole point (cognitive dissonance) that all fighters know: that we can only become better fighters by actually fighting. Whether you get paid or not, the only way to become better at fighting is through fighting. The forms, drills which all fighting methods have btw are just preparations for fighting training.

I don’t know if this forum has any fighters by that kind of definition? If not then we should worry so much about semantics of who is or isn’t a fighter or whose shade of reality is more realistic. None would be fighters.

**It's not semantics. It is the recognition of the most basic of training principles -- that we need to actually do the activity to get better at the activity. To become a better swimmer we need to actually swim. To become a better fighter we need to actually fight. So if one never swims or one never fights (regardless of how long they practice forms or drills) they will never have any WCK skill (since WCK is fighting).

Real fighting is a totally different game and feeling. Differences are subtle and not obvious from the surface. On the surface both types of fighting look very similar. In professional fighting, you can’t afford to take as many risks. Eventually you risk some kind of permanent damage.

**There is no such thing as "real fighting" -- there is just fighting. I've mixed it up with pro fighters, amatuer fighters, and folks that fight as part of their normal training. It's all the same. Fighting is a contact activity (perhaps the most intense of contact activities), like (american) football or rugby and comes with inherent risks (btw, there is pro rugby and amatuer rugby but it's the same game just at different levels of skill). We can try to minimize those risks with various means, but some risks remain. Injuries occur. But that'sthe nature of the activity. If you don't like the risks associated with rugby, then don't play.

In Escrima, those who fight with a stick with no protection are real fighters. Maybe even the Dog brothers don’t qualify as fighters? Those who use protection and nerf padded sticks are not real fighters. Those who train with wooden knives and rubber knives are not real fighters no matter how intensively they fight. There just isn’t the same risk involved as when facing a real sharp blade.

**You don't grasp the nature of "intensity" -- it is not just "moving fast" but involves the level of the opponent's attributes, the level of the opponent's skill, and the amount of risk involved. Certainly we can't train at life-and-death intensity (we'd kill our training partners or be killed). But we can train at sufficient levels of risk, even with weapons, that will provide the proper mental "respect" (where you can be hurt).

If you want to be a real fighter then spending less than 6 hours in the gym or having an average looking body just won’t cut it in the professional world.

**There are levels of fighting skill -- it's not a matter of you're either pro or you have nothing. Higher levels of fighting skill include higher levels of conditioning among other things.

It’s true that real fighters don’t spar full out with their training partners. They are careful and use protection. But you can’t draw the conclusion that by training like that in the identical fashion and even with those guys will put you in the same distinguished category.

**It has nothing to do with being in a "distinguished category". It's simple -- if you want to increase your fighting skill, regardless of your method, you need to fight. If you don't fight, you'll never significantly increase your fighting (WCK) skill. If a "WCK master" who trained with Yip Man, has spent over 20 years practicing WCK, is renowned for his chi sao ("touching hands"), has taught for years, etc. but never fought as part of his training, we will never have developed good WCK. To put it bluntly, he'll suck. If we pit him against a MMAist with just a year or two of training (not a pro but someone that has put in some time actually fighting), the WCK master will get his @ss handed to him.

It’s the same as people who are very proud of the masters that taught them and feel elevated above those people who don’t have as good a teacher.

**It's not about "pride", it is about training. To get certain results, we must train a certain way.

Professionals put themselves at risk and play for as real as is acceptable under the law. That’s a big difference. Indeed there are two categories of martial artists those who fight and those who don’t. Fighters are the professionals who do that as a living. If you don’t do that, then the rest of the talk about the reality of fighting is just hot air.

**This is all just theory to you because you don't have experience. I know of many people in WCK that train (fight) with pro fighters, cage fighters, NHB fighters, etc. I know people that have boxed their whole lives, that get in the ring weekly, but never had a pro fight. Anyone that fights, at any level, is putting themselves at risk -- that's a necessary ingredient of fighting. A person can't learn to deal with these risks (getting hit, etc.) without facing them.

Most classical martial arts clubs are not set up to train fighters who would fights for a living. Few teachers have that experience and furthermore to make a living they have to cater to a wide variety of students. If trying to cater to the fighters then 90% of their bread and butter students would quit the training. So that’s another practical concern.

**Most YMCAs are not equipped to train olympic level swimmers but they all have a pool and everyone who goes there to learn to swim gets into it. Not all boxing gyms have trainers that can get you to olympic level boxing but they all have rings and everyone that goes there to learn to box will get into it. You learn to swim by swimming and you learn to box (fight) by boxing (fighting). Most MA schools don't cater to people that want to actually become better fighters, they cater to people who want other things and they sell them these other things. In my mind, they aren't martial art schools since they don't train martial arts (fighting).

In my mind, the usefulness of classical martial arts is not judged by how many professional fighters it produces. Of course if some art produces a world-class professional fighter then the natural human tendency is to brag about one’s great art.

**If someone is concerned with actually achieving increased performance results (becoming a better fighter), they need to focus on results. The POV expoused above makes me wonder -- do you think that you can become a better or more skillful fighter without fighting? If so, why not test your theory? So far, the world has yet to produce a skilled fighter that way but perhaps you kow of someone that has been hiding? ;) Or do you think that we can't really become better fighters without being pro fighters? And if that is the case, then why practice a MA in the first place?

Regards,

Terence

[PaulH]

Normally I stay away from questions like "are you a fighter for real?" as it can spin easily to a thousand and one variations of good storytelling. I prefer a more down to earth fanfare for the common man. =) You are a fighter when you choose to fight instead of running away from your problem. True! You may be a bad, horrible, or low-level contemptible kind of fighter, but you are definitely a real threat nevertheless to those who dare to cross your path. For they like all human have their unguarded moment, and that is often just enough. Just musing out loud on a Saturday morning! =)

[sihing]

Terence,
For me as an individual, my training became more than just about fighting and becoming a fighter per say. Like I have said before if fighting ability was everything, for me anyways, I could have stopped 13yrs ago and just continued on my own with what I had learned up to that point. At that time I was sparring (fighting as you define it) weekly and I could have easily just stopped learning more and more and just practiced the techniques at that level and sparred some more. When you are put into that environment you will definitely improve at a faster pace, than just doing forms, and air drills. But for me I became more curious about the art and I wanted to learn more about it. "What's next" is what I kept asking myself and I was also curious to see how my skill would grow too. Video taping is a very useful tool here as you can see the progression in skill over a period of time, and this reinforces positive feedback that improvement is actually happening. Today, I am involved with other areas of WC, mostly in the realm of teaching and promotion. Does this mean I can't fight anymore? Well, obviously there is always room for improvement and if I stepped up my training, in both the conditioning realm and sparring realm, my skill would definitely grow as a result, but on the other hand I also believe in WC's inherent combat effectiveness, so therefore if one is a "expert", and by this I do not mean a master or someone that is perfect at it, but someone that knows the systems, and can perform the movements and concepts in a live environment and with competency, then they will have fighting ability as a by product of that knowledge. It’s all on what you as an individual want, and what you focus on. For me I would just like to perfect the WC system I am involved with, not becoming the master fighter that some look for, and this is okay too, everyone has the right to do anything they want with it.


James

[captain]

James, WC in Calgary,how great.i used to live near midnapool.[not right spelling].
Russ

[Ultimatewingchun]

"It's not semantics. It is the recognition of the most basic of training principles -- that we need to actually do the activity to get better at the activity. To become a better swimmer we need to actually swim. To become a better fighter we need to actually fight. So if one never swims or one never fights (regardless of how long they practice forms or drills) they will never have any WCK skill (since WCK is fighting)." (Terence)



This paragraph says it all.

[YongChun]

Here's a DRILL. I try to stab you with a knife. You try to defend. From this drill both sides will achieve something that can be used in a real fight. This drills is useful for real fighting. Next substitute an Escrima stick and do the same. This prepares you for a real fight.

Here's a form. Keep the knife almost hidden from view and keep it very close to your body so that it can't be grabbed or kicked out of your hand. Move in quickly and show the knife at the last momement. That's the Form. This form is useful for real fighting.

It's not fight OR do forms and drills, it's doing all of the above in a proper balance. Fighting comes when you are ready for it. Training should be progressive to make you reach that point.

If you have never kicked someone's knee out or really hit someone in the back of the head or side of the neck to cause a real knockout, you might be surprised that in real what you thought worked in intensive sparring doesn't work. I have seen a few cases like that from experienced competitive fighters.

Sparring with lots of protection gives you a false sense of reality. The Dog brothers are a step closer to reality but according to those Esrimadors who have fought for real, not close enough. Two tough guys hammering each other in the ring with protection without knocking each other's brains out, are swimmming in the bath tub instead of on dry land. Those who learn to fight in jail or have millitary combat experience are the ones who really swim. All the rest is just various forms of dry land swimming.

The real the fight, the more confidence that you will get. The main problem is just how to do that safely. The more safe, the more it is dry land swimming. Training with a wooden stick is totally different than training with a sharp edged weapon.

There is play fighting which any kind of sparring is and then there is real fighting where you intend to seriously hurt your opponent.

Ring fighting is also very different from street fighting. Mixing it up in the ring with your buddies only prepares you for that kind of fighting and makes you comfortable in that realm of play. Real combat involves many elements. Unless you mix it up with fighters of all kinds and not just MMA, BJJ and boxers, you will never be aware of what some humans can do to you in a fight. MMA, BJJ, Boxing and Thai boxing are exellent for ring fighting. reported street attacks and killings are never like ring fights.

Real fighting is three guys trying to smash you or stab you with sharpend pipes. If you aren't training for that, then what are you training for? Will working out with boxers help that?

I think playing around with BJJ people to see if your Wing Chun will work in that environment is also a waste of time in the same way that BJJ would waste their time training Chi sau. If you like that stuff then just train it for five year. If you like Thai boxing then train it for five years. Just mixing it up with those guys is not that useful. Those things are sports. If you want to fight, try walking into a Silat club in Indonesia with an attitude.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Here's a form. Keep the knife almost hidden from view and keep it very close to your body so that it can't be grabbed or kicked out of your hand. Move in quickly and show the knife at the last momement. That's the Form. This form is useful for real fighting."
(Yongchun)

It's useful only AFTER it's no longer a form...because you're now (hopefully) practicing the move against a resisting partner.

Forms have some value...true...but in the final analysis they're just a dance that one performs alone.

Sparring/fighting is a whole different experience against a live resisting partner/opponent.

"The more real the fight, the more confidence that you will get. The main problem is just how to do that safely. The more safe, the more it is dry land swimming. Training with a wooden stick is totally different than training with a sharp edged weapon. "
(Yongchun)

True...but that doesn't change the fact that sparring (even with protective equipment) can get very realistic and very rough...

much rougher and more realistic than forms, drills, or chi sao (even a rough chi sao still has too many rules to be considered as realistic as sparring).

[YongChun]

The rougher the training, the more risks you take the closer to reality. But that's not always usefull to train that way especially if you get injured for 6 months at a time (happened to me a few times). After enough injuries you tend to train smarter with almost the same results. I found the very rough training often produces tense fighters who only rely on speed and strength. They really were no more effective in a real fight than people who trained in a calmer fashion. In fact these tense guys were for the most part much easier to beat. MOstly their arts resembled more kickboxing than anything to do with Wing Chun.

Weapons fighters in Chinese martial art (the ones I am familiar with anyway), tend to drill with real weapons and after that fight for real. The main thing is drills with the real weapon with the right kind of drills. If you train any other way like by actually trying to cut your sparring partner's arm off, then that's idiotic. My Hung style teacher and another teacher who was from Choy Lay Fut both trained their art with forms and drills. After that they went out to fight for real. The Hong Kong Wing Chun guys in Wong Shun Leung's club that we encountered in the late 80's trained a very rough chi sau and after that some just went out and fought. They didn't feel the need to spar with boxers and BJJ stylists.

The Wing Chun fighters I have known (only two mind you) worked for Asian drug gangs. These guys were very relaxed, very hard hitters, very economical and fearlessly went in. They never trained in boxing, sparred around with kickboxers or practiced with Brazillian Jujitsu. But also they didn't fight these kinds of people in a ring. Maybe if they did they might have been interested in that. According to them, the real fights tended to involve weapons or multiple opponents.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"Here's a form. Keep the knife almost hidden from view and keep it very close to your body so that it can't be grabbed or kicked out of your hand. Move in quickly and show the knife at the last momement. That's the Form. This form is useful for real fighting."
(Yongchun)

It's useful only AFTER it's no longer a form...because you're now (hopefully) practicing the move against a resisting partner.



Yes that's what I said, you also have to have a realistic DRILL to go with it. Trying to stab your partner with a knife is a drill that encompasses a lot of things. The drill and form eventually becomes natural and in fact seemingly formless.

After that anything more realistic will only get you killed.

In most clubs the training is progressive in that the teacher feeds a little more to the student than that student can handle. It does no good to go even harder and break his nose and split his lip, although that would give him a good taste of reality. Some students take a long time before they are ready for a rough and tough sparring match against a realistic opponent. A lot will always be limited in that kind of fight by their size.

Seriously speaking, instead of all this foolish talk that we are all doing, in our club anyway we have to cater to a variety of students. Some think like Terrence and some don't. Some have fought for their living and some have never been in a fight.

The fighters have done that and are no longer interested. Some have competed, one at Olympic level, one at state or province level (Judo, wrestling). Some have done that and are no longer interested in this. Then we have some older people who want to learn martial arts. We don't have them spar with wild fast, strong partners. They can't even remember the form. Then we have some you ladies in junior school and high school. The mix is all over the map.

Realistically there is no way the students who are just getting into Wing Chun can match the people who have fought and who also outweigh them by 100 pounds. IT doesn't do them anygood to put on gloves and spar with the fighters.

Yet the fighters try to help those who are not fighters to slowly have them progress up the continuum of fighting. Everyone is a fighter in training but just all different levels. Progress is limited by people's talents, how much they train and their genetic attributes and intelligence. But we treat everyone as special, everyone as equal and don't divide the class up into two groups: the fighters and the wimps and those who are too chicken to fight. When people are ready, then they can fight, no sooner than that. No one is under any misconception about what they can handle in a real fight.

Those people who really like to fight, tend to go outside of the club compete in tournaments or cross train in other arts or spar against friends who have learned something else. One student trains Thai boxing and another is into submission wrestling.

Some students end up as fights as part of their job in correctional work or police work or in bouncing work. Some will never be fighters but we encourage them to keep at it and slowly they progress. All the students like the variety of things physical and mental that Wing Chun has to offer. These things tend to keep up the interest such that the students keep coming and coming. Those who train very intensively, I have found, eventually can't take it anymore and totally give up.

Within any club the opinions will vary as much as on this forum. It all depends on the background of the student. Some clubs just happen to draw in more fighters and some just don't. You work accordingly with whatever mix shows up and tailor the training for what they need. Different strokes for different folks but no use to look down on anyone or to put a special label on their forehead that says : I am a wimp because I'm scared to fight.

It's the challenge of the teacher to provide what the student is looking for. It's the challenge of the teacher to teach as realistic fighting as possible while keeping his students safe from serious injury. It's the duty of the teacher to keep his students from fighting on the streets. It's the duty of the teacher to give the student a realistic idea of what he can really do. It's the challenge of the teacher to inspire the student to research the art and to become better than himself. It's the duty of the teacher to absorb what is useful from the fighting world and from forums such as this for the benefit of his students.

In our club we have tried various Wing Chun approaches. We have found that those approaches that involve lots of fighting and minimal work on forms or chi sau don't produce a high quality of Wing Chun as shown to us by some people we consider as masters of the art. The approach of these people was very elegant, mimimal effort, powerful, relaxed and very effective. quite possibly we could have hit these guys in the head with a wild shot but that's not what we are training for. How you train really depends on who you have met no matter from what style. Some people have met some high level practitioners for the sake of example let's use Chen Xiaowang (I don't like to push just the Wing Chun people I happen to like). Then those who like that kind of skill will tend to follow his suggestions of how to train. Those who have met Frank Shamrock and like that kind of fighting will tend to follow his methods. Whatever. Either camp can fight.

[t_niehoff]

**A few random comments:

YongChun wrote:

In most clubs the training is progressive in that the teacher feeds a little more to the student than that student can handle.

**It all hinges on how one defines "progress" (training is progressive) -- for me, since the objective is to become a better fighter via WCK training, one can only measure progress toward that goal by fighting (you can't measure one's progress toward being a better swimmer without getting in the water).

It does no good to go even harder and break his nose and split his lip, although that would give him a good taste of reality. Some students take a long time before they are ready for a rough and tough sparring match against a realistic opponent. A lot will always be limited in that kind of fight by their size.

**Funny how all the methods that produce fighters, boxing, wrestling, muay thai, BKK, kyokushinkai, etc. don't find that limitation -- they get the student into fighting right away. Admit it, your premise is that one can become a better fighter without fighting and that one needs to spend a lot of time doing forms and drills before they can even think about fighting. You are wrong on both counts.

Realistically there is no way the students who are just getting into Wing Chun can match the people who have fought and who also outweigh them by 100 pounds. IT doesn't do them anygood to put on gloves and spar with the fighters.

**You don't get it -- it's not about beating our training (fighting) partners up, it is about learning and getting better. I may not be able to beat a BJJ black belt when I'm a white/blue/purple belt, but I get better by rolling (fighting) with one. I may not be able to beat a pro boxer but I get better by getting in the ring with one. The better our training (fighting) partners, the better we become.

Yet the fighters try to help those who are not fighters to slowly have them progress up the continuum of fighting.

**There is no "continuum of fighting" -- this is like nonswimmers talking about "slowly having students progress up toward getting in the water"! You either get in the water or you don't; you either fight or you don't.

Everyone is a fighter in training but just all different levels.

**I can be a pilot in training too, but if I never fly a plane, I can't call myself a pilot and I'll never learn to fly without doing it.

Progress is limited by people's talents, how much they train and their genetic attributes and intelligence.

**Agreed.

But we treat everyone as special, everyone as equal and don't divide the class up into two groups: the fighters and the wimps and those who are too chicken to fight. When people are ready, then they can fight, no sooner than that. No one is under any misconception about what they can handle in a real fight.

**When I took swimming lessons at the Y many years ago (when I was 3 or 4 years old), the very first day they had us climb up to the top of the high dive and jump into the water (they pulled us out with a pole). Then we spent every class in the water. Everyone was equal and everyone learned to swim. They didn't have those that "weren't ready to get in the water" practice on the side of the pool.

Some clubs just happen to draw in more fighters and some just don't.

**That's just not true -- it is no happenstance.

You work accordingly with whatever mix shows up and tailor the training for what they need.

**If they "need" to become better fighters, then they need to fight as part of their training, it's as simple as that.

Different strokes for different folks but no use to look down on anyone or to put a special label on their forehead that says : I am a wimp because I'm scared to fight.

**Forget the labels and concentrate on the training principle -- if someone wants to become a better fighter (with WCK or BJJ or whatever) they need to fight as part of their training. Period. If they don't do that, for whatever reason, they will never become skilled.

In our club we have tried various Wing Chun approaches. We have found that those approaches that involve lots of fighting and minimal work on forms or chi sau don't produce a high quality of Wing Chun as shown to us by some people we consider as masters of the art.

**The objective of WCK to make us a better fighter. So how can someone judge the "quality of WCK" apart from fighting (to see if those results were obtained)? Oh, your tan sao "looks" so much better today? LOL! WCK , like any MA, is fighting and just like one can't judge the quality of someone's BJJ without having them roll or the quality of someone's boxing without having them box they can't judge the quality of someone's WCK without having them fight. Forms or chi sao (drills) are steps in training to make us better fighters, so their "quality" again can only be determined by fighting (has the form or drill actually produced those results). You can consider X a "master of the art" while someone else can consider him a dunce; someone else may consider Y a "master of the art" and you may consider him a scrub. These things are all subjective because the "judgments" are not performance-based.

The approach of these people was very elegant, mimimal effort, powerful, relaxed and very effective. quite possibly we could have hit these guys in the head with a wild shot but that's not what we are training for.

**It is fairly easy to be elegent, use minimum effort, be powerful, relaxed and appear effective in drills (chi sao) and demonstrations (same with lots of "masters" of all kinds of MAs) -- it is quite another thing to have these qualities in fighting. After all, if you do the same drill (chi sao) enough, you'll get "good" at how you do that drill. That doesn't mean it will translate into being a good fighter (you may be doing things that look great in the drill but will fail miserably in fighting). If it did, these "masters" would be more than willing to step up and mix it up with proven, skillful fighters.

How you train really depends on who you have met no matter from what style.

**This is true for nonfighters since they copy the things they have seen; fighters will find those things that work for them (and will not "look" like "who they have met".

Some people have met some high level practitioners for the sake of example let's use Chen Xiaowang (I don't like to push just the Wing Chun people I happen to like). Then those who like that kind of skill will tend to follow his suggestions of how to train.

**I could kick CXW's @ss; so would Ernie, Andrew, and anyone else that fights as part of their training. CXW has no fighting skill. And I'm not bragging because I'm not very good (lots of folks can beat me) -- but I fight as part of my training and he doesn't. A MMAist with 2 years training that fights regularly would destroy CXW too, because CXW doesn't get into the pool so he can't be a good swimmer. All his forms and drills (push hands) mean nothing if he isn't fighting. But you're right -- nonfighters see him in demo and are impressed, and they follow what he says thinking that if they do, they'll become as "good" too. The rub is that he is good in demo but not in fighting, and by doing what he does will never make them skilled fighters (and, of course, that's why we don't see any tai ji fighters).

Those who have met Frank Shamrock and like that kind of fighting will tend to follow his methods. Whatever. Either camp can fight.

**Everyone, even folks with no training, can fight. The issue is whether a person's training will significantly increase their fighting performance. All fighters, including Shamrock, fight as part of their training -- that's why their performance increases. Other folks, like you, want to believe that they can increase their fighting performance without fighting ("either camp can fight") -- you are wrong. That position is refuted by evidence, by history and by how human beings improve in any physical activity. But, as I've repeatedly said, if you want to find out for yourself the validity of your position, there is an easy way to find out.

Regards,

Terence

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun

If you have never kicked someone's knee out or really hit someone in the back of the head or side of the neck to cause a real knockout, you might be surprised that in real what you thought worked in intensive sparring doesn't work. I have seen a few cases like that from experienced competitive fighters.

yeah, it's funny how that works...when adrenaline is rushing and heart rate increases, you will only retain that which is ingrained into you muscle memory. If nothing is ingrained, you will either freeze or flail, most likely. Contact helps to overcome freezing and teaches you to retain control in high adrenaline situations. By doing the basics over and over, they get ingrained quickly.

Sparring with lots of protection gives you a false sense of reality. The Dog brothers are a step closer to reality but according to those Esrimadors who have fought for real, not close enough. Two tough guys hammering each other in the ring with protection without knocking each other's brains out, are swimmming in the bath tub instead of on dry land. Those who learn to fight in jail or have millitary combat experience are the ones who really swim. All the rest is just various forms of dry land swimming.

not really. if you were only referring to point sarring I would agree with you. But, hard contact is hard contact. If you don't think so, find some local fights and enter them. 12 oz. gloves aren't that big and headgear isn't that thick. If you get hit hard yhou know it. KO's are still produced in the amateurs, where protection is still worn.

that said though, I take it you are training against real knives all the time, doing eye gouges and throat strikes in training all the time, groin shots on a regular basis, fighting multiple opponents full contact, balls to the wall,etc. all the time, right? If not, perhaps the sport fighter's pool is a bit more real than yours...

The real the fight, the more confidence that you will get. The main problem is just how to do that safely. The more safe, the more it is dry land swimming. Training with a wooden stick is totally different than training with a sharp edged weapon.

so you admit to being on dry land. cool.

There is play fighting which any kind of sparring is and then there is real fighting where you intend to seriously hurt your opponent.

hmm....like being in the ring?

Ring fighting is also very different from street fighting.

that is true.


Mixing it up in the ring with your buddies only prepares you for that kind of fighting and makes you comfortable in that realm of play.

Not really. There are lessons learned from contact fighting that carry over into the street.

Unless you mix it up with fighters of all kinds and not just MMA, BJJ and boxers, you will never be aware of what some humans can do to you in a fight. MMA, BJJ, Boxing and Thai boxing are exellent for ring fighting. reported street attacks and killings are never like ring fights.

you may have stepped on the toes of more than half the guys on the forum with that one.

street attacks and killings are not like your safe cushiony training and chi sau either... It kills me when people say things like "thai boxing isn't like a street fight. In my class, we train against multiple attackers and learn weapons" Whatever... That said, however, a real fight is sudden violence. An opponent or opponents who want to take your head off as fast as they can, however they can. As I said above, ring fighting will teach you valuable lessons in dealing with that.

Real fighting is three guys trying to smash you or stab you with sharpend pipes. If you aren't training for that, then what are you training for? Will working out with boxers help that?

you know what though? That's NOT reality...not necessarily. I've been in several fights, some involving multiple attackers, none involving multiple people who all had weapons. I've gone to the ground in fights and not been "stomped by the guys buddies" I've chased down a mugger while his friends waited for him to get in the car so they could get away - no shots were fired, none of them got out of the car. I've had a friend that was stomped by eight guys. I've had friends that were shot and killed. I've got friends that are in jail for killing people.

What's the point? That reality is different for everyone. More than half of the people involved in MA will never have to use their skills. That's the reality. you are training for a possibility. Sport fighters train for an inevitability. They WILL fight again. people tend to always take an extreme situation and say "this is reality - this is what we train for"..that's BS. That's the reality of it.

I think playing around with BJJ people to see if your Wing Chun will work in that environment is also a waste of time in the same way that BJJ would waste their time training Chi sau. If you like that stuff then just train it for five year. If you like Thai boxing then train it for five years. Just mixing it up with those guys is not that useful. Those things are sports. If you want to fight, try walking into a Silat club in Indonesia with an attitude.

I have a greater chance of getting taken down than I do of ending up in a trapping match with someone. When you get taken to the ground, how do you get up efficiently? How do you get up at all? you've got a big, 300lb killer with boulders for hands raining punches down on you like bombs, and his buddies are circling up, preparing to stomp you into the dirt (see the exaggeration there?) How do you get back to your feet? That's where grappling comes in. Grappling has it's own sensitivity training, as does thai boxing, they don't need chi sau. what they do need is what they lack. For the former, striking, and the latter, grappling. That's why people cross train.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
The rougher the training, the more risks you take the closer to reality. But that's not always usefull to train that way especially if you get injured for 6 months at a time (happened to me a few times). After enough injuries you tend to train smarter with almost the same results. I found the very rough training often produces tense fighters who only rely on speed and strength. They really were no more effective in a real fight than people who trained in a calmer fashion. In fact these tense guys were for the most part much easier to beat. MOstly their arts resembled more kickboxing than anything to do with Wing Chun.

As I stated above - when techniques are not ingrained, you will either freeze or flail. Sounds like these guys took the flailing route. There is alot more to kickboxing then throwing out punches and kicks. They mad have resembled a badly trained kicboxer, but that's about it.

Weapons fighters in Chinese martial art (the ones I am familiar with anyway), tend to drill with real weapons and after that fight for real. The main thing is drills with the real weapon with the right kind of drills. If you train any other way like by actually trying to cut your sparring partner's arm off, then that's idiotic. My Hung style teacher and another teacher who was from Choy Lay Fut both trained their art with forms and drills. After that they went out to fight for real. The Hong Kong Wing Chun guys in Wong Shun Leung's club that we encountered in the late 80's trained a very rough chi sau and after that some just went out and fought. They didn't feel the need to spar with boxers and BJJ stylists.

How many schools are there that do this? I bet you'll find that the majority don't. When I was training jkd, we would do drills with real machettes on occasion, but it wasn't a regular basis thing.


According to them, the real fights tended to involve weapons or multiple opponents.

As I said above, reality is different from person to person.

[Vajramusti]

**I could kick CXW's @ss;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CXW got scared off after reading this.:D

[Ultimatewingchun]

"CXW got scared off after reading this."

It's not about whether he's scared off or not - it's about the fact that he's a good example of someone who doesn't fight (or even spar with some heavy contact - that we know of)...but yet commands much respect from some people who are so impressed with demos, forms, drills, push hands, chi sao, etc. - that they have lost sight of the whole purpose of martial arts...being able to fight.

No amount of forms, drills, chi sao, etc. can ever take the place of actual fighting or hard sparring.

There is just so much more to fighting/sparring than what's contained in all of the other above-mentioned scenarios.

It's like a baseball player who never goes up against an opposing pitcher with a 95 mph fastball that catches the low inside corner for strike one...who might follow with another fastball at his head that knocks him down...who then throws a 68 mph change-up that's low and away...might then throw a curve ball that backed him off the plate but caught the high inside corner for strike two...back to the 95 mph fastball for strike three on the low outside part of the plate.

Instead - This guy has never played in a real game...all this "player" has ever done has been batting practice against a pitcher who's a friend of his - and who lobs the ball over the middle of the plate at 80 mph...tells him when he's going to throw a curve...tells him when the slider is coming, etc.

and the result is that our "player" looks great hitting a bunch of balls deep to center or over the wall.

Big deal !

[old jong]

I'm waiting for the water polo analogy!...:rolleyes: ;)

[Redd]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
**I could kick CXW's @ss

I've been looking for a good sig line. This is priceless.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
[B
**I could kick CXW's @ss; so would Ernie, Andrew, and anyone else that fights as part of their training. CXW has no fighting skill.

**Other folks, like you, want to believe that they can increase their fighting performance without fighting ("either camp can fight") -- you are wrong. That position is refuted by evidence, by history and by how human beings improve in any physical activity. But, as I've repeatedly said, if you want to find out for yourself the validity of your position, there is an easy way to find out.

Regards,

Terence [/B]

Hi Terrence. Don't get too worked up it's bad for your heart. It's only a discussion. For me I have seen people from both camps who can fight. There is no doubt about what you are saying will produce a good ring fighter. However you negate all fighters from any Kung Fu style, Silat style or whatever who don't train in a boxing ring or train BJJ. I would love to see you fight someone from each of these arts and tell them to their face that they can't fight.

Also I love to see you and Ernie and Andrew fight Chen XiaoWang. In fact there are maybe some better Tai Chi fighters in the South but I trust Chen XiaoWang can do a good job on you. You have never tried to fight him and so it's easy to spout a lot of hot air like that. I can beat Mike Tyson as well and of course the dry land swimmer Chen XiaoWang.

First we are having a discussion. We have had enough fighters who fight and have people who cross train and have compared results. There is a difference between producing a fighter and producing the best fighter. Some of our students have never had a fight in their life but survived fighting on the street. Thet fought. They were fighters. That's not to say that what you are advocating wouldn't have made them better. No argument there.

In my Hung style training the Drill and then they fight. I know a couple of top students were into multiple opponent fights putting all into the hospital. In one fight they guys in the hospital had bicycle chains. Other students we have had have competed in tournaments, had fights as bouncers, have had fights as part of their police work or have had fights as part of their correctional institute (jail) jobs. Also I met two who regularly fought as part of their drug gang activity. That experience is not part of your experience so you just can't relate to it and that's fine. We are just sharing experiences.

My Hung style teacher (James Lore in Toronto) did nothing but fight in his early days. They did forms , then they drilled and drilled and then they fought and fought. He taught the same way and some of his students were very good. One student trained many years just to get in to a fast kicker. That's what it took. One he was in, they were dead. There are just different ways to train which can produce good fighting results. I have seen lots of good fighters in my years in different arts and they didn't hang around in boxing clubs or train BJJ. None of the Hung style guys did. Joe Lewis was a Karate blackbelt in about 6 months. In his first few ring matches he was already a terror in the ring. He went from forms and drills into the ring. Successive fights of course made him better.

I certainly don't say that what any of the type A personality fighters say about fighting intensively each day against opponents you don't know is a bad thing. It's a very good thing if you want to be a good fighter. No one can deny that that's the best way if like to do thatt. The best is actual street fighting if you are training for that and constant ring fighting of you are training for that. For ring fighting, Wing Chun training is not the best and it is better to just switch to the arts and training methodologies that have proved effective. If I was training to compete in the ring, then I certainly wouldn't be training in Wing Chun. If I am training to survive in the street then I wouldn't limit myself to Wing Chun either. I would definitely train stick , knife and gun as well as any other kind of street tactics that work. Still that might not be as good as our premier training academies known as jail or as mind toughening as spending time fighting in Iraq. The latter forms of training are really the best.

I think if I take a type A aggressive personality and drill him to death then there won't be any doubt that he could fight. But to compare fighters and training methods that is a different story. That's why we have a million kinds of fighting arts because no one can agree.

We have fighters. We have people who cross train. None of use were born yesterday and we aren't 20 year olds who know everything and yet don't know what we are talking about.

It's very easy to say that to become a fighter you have to go out and fight. That kind of statement is obvious. But that kind of statement seems very useful to tack on to the end of every thread. It's a lot harder to have an intelligent discussion about the details of training methods which can apply to a wide variety of individuals to produce good results. Fortunately a few other more useful threads are starting up to discuss these other issues. There is only so much mileage you can get out of the dry land swimming analogy. Maybe switch to race car driving or something else for variety to spice up this talk.

So let's start a betting pool of who will win, Chen Xiaowang or Terrence. Maybe Terrence can barge in on his seminar like Emin Boztepe did to William Cheung and prove it this way with the cameras rolling. The video would make millions and then everyone involved could retire to the beach.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by old jong
I'm waiting for the water polo analogy!...:rolleyes: ;)

I am waiting for all the talkers to produce one good fighter who can show the world that Wing Chun really works. I don't see that day coming. Valuable training time is being lost discussing instead of training for such an event. We need a committee to organize the event. We need to select a lineage willing to train the fighter. I'll take the bets and award the prizes.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by SevenStar


Hi SevenStar,

I agree with your comments. All this is just to get discussion going but it would be nice to get to something concrete as well such as experiences and lessons learned from the fighters. BJJ has many good ideas that anyone can work on and try. Telling someone just to go in the ring against a good Thai boxer and fight just isn't very useful. I already know something will break if I do that. I don't need to try and block a roundhouse kick with a Gan sau to know that my arms will break. I will accept the opinions of those who tried that.

I think there has to be a progression and not day 1 sign up for Wing Chun and day 2 fight a Thai boxer. I think that's the model proposed by Terrence: day 1 throw the student off the highest diving board into the pool and day 2 see if he comes around for further lessons.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"CXW got scared off after reading this."

It's not about whether he's scared off or not - it's about the fact that he's a good example of someone who doesn't fight (or even spar with some heavy contact - that we know of)...but yet commands much respect from some people who are so impressed with demos, forms, drills, push hands, chi sao, etc. - that they have lost sight of the whole purpose of martial arts...being able to fight.


Big deal !

It would be interesting to hear what the Tai Chi people think about that. I think I will arrange a match between one of our people who fights and him. If the money is right like a few million dollars then that would be great. It will put the Tai Chi theory that they can fight to rest once and for all. There are just too many people wasting their time doing this useless form of activity when they should be training full contact in the ring.

Actually I would love to see Emin Boztepe vs Chen XiaoWang. I wonder what can be learned from such a match. The public match between Crane style and Wu style certainly wasn't impressive. In that case Emin would have taken them both at the same time.

[Vajramusti]

Where is the popcorn for the virtual reality internet shows?:D

[Ernie]

Also I love to see you and Ernie and Andrew fight Chen XiaoWang



whoopie !!!!

now i have to go beat up old tai chi guys

been there done that , not this particular individual , of course he might have special powers
:o

but so far one master dude said he was from shaolin , don't know his name i suck a chinese barely remember yip man

and about 2 months ago some idiot given me crap for useing sticks and protective gear at the park

it was drawing attention from his [ shine ]
said it wasnot needed [sound familer]

and he got dropped and his pretty white pajamas dirty

[ both guys had terrible foot work and couldn't time a broken rythem entry . i slapped one in the nuts and kneed the other in they thigh as he leaned back and tried to absorb my high line
the pain shot froze both guys up and both got reaped to the floor
, i made it a point to break there root ,]

what does it all mean

----- nothing----- i was better prepared next time i may not be
who cares life goes on

styles don't fight people do

now back to bum fights :rolleyes:

why don't terrance and ray meet slap each other around and compare training methods

now that would be just as fun , right ?

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
**I could kick CXW's @ss; so would Ernie, Andrew, and anyone else that fights as part of their training. CXW has no fighting skill...

We are indeed from different planets. :D

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[old jong]

No comment.

[kj]

No need. I can read your mind.
- kj

[Ernie]

Originally posted by kj
No need. I can read your mind.
- kj

that's some high level chi sau skill you got there lady :p

[kj]

Originally posted by Ernie
that's some high level chi sau skill you got there lady :p

Ha! Call it a knack. You're next. :D
- kj

[SevenStar]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by YongChun
Hi SevenStar,

I agree with your comments. All this is just to get discussion going but it would be nice to get to something concrete as well such as experiences and lessons learned from the fighters. BJJ has many good ideas that anyone can work on and try. Telling someone just to go in the ring against a good Thai boxer and fight just isn't very useful.

That's just the thing... it IS useful - once you do it. We can talk and theorize all day - this is a discussion forum after all - but at the end of the day, you haven't actually learned anything in the way of fighting other than more theory.


I already know something will break if I do that. I don't need to try and block a roundhouse kick with a Gan sau to know that my arms will break. I will accept the opinions of those who tried that.

lol, coincidentally, I know of people who say they they can...

QUOTE]

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ernie
why don't terrance and ray meet slap each other around and compare training methods

now that would be just as fun , right ?

That wouldn't mean anything because I don't claim to be anything. But Chen XiaoWang claims to be a master and Terrence claims he can beat him. So that's why this would be a good match. I want to see the soft internal beat the hard external like all the books say.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by SevenStar
[QUOTE]Originally posted by YongChun

I agree with your comments. All this is just to get discussion going but it would be nice to get to something concrete as well such as experiences and lessons learned from the fighters. BJJ has many good ideas that anyone can work on and try. Telling someone just to go in the ring against a good Thai boxer and fight just isn't very useful.

That's just the thing... it IS useful - once you do it. We can talk and theorize all day - this is a discussion forum after all - but at the end of the day, you haven't actually learned anything in the way of fighting other than more theory.

[QUOTE]

It's not useful at all. You'd just get beaten up.
You guys don't even know how the Thai's train: How can you compete against them? It's pure arrogance to think you can just go in the ring like that.



Originally posted by YongChun
If I was training to compete in the ring, then I certainly wouldn't be training in Wing Chun.

Bloody right. Because it's hasn't technically got enough to survive in the ring. It's as plain as day that most WC people aren't skilled in enough. Poor defence against kicks in a kickboxing match? What the hell did they think would happen? This is a technical weakness.

All this talk about who can kick who's @ss is a joke. No WC people train at a professional enough level to even talk about pro fighting. Learn from the pros first hand. In Muay Thai/kickboxing, AFAIK Thailand, Japan and to a far lesser extent China have a truly professional industry. Go there and ACTUALLY learn rather than perpetuate the bum fighting industry. Western countries don't quite have the same level of professionalism in kickboxing but it's growing.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Edmund
It's not useful at all. You'd just get beaten up.
You guys don't even know how the Thai's train: How can you compete against them? It's pure arrogance to think you can just go in the ring like that.

I wasn't referring to stepping in the ring as the second lesson. If you had actually read the post I was replying to, he was saying that he's trying to have a discussion about fighter's experiences and such. he was saying that telling him to get into a ring isn't useful. I say that it is.

[CFT]

My impression from the posts already made in this thread is that both Ray and Terrence agree on actually using WCK to fight, as opposed to doing forms ad nauseum; the major contention is the time frame. By "fight", I am "redefining" this to mean someone outside of your own school.

Terrence is advocating for pretty much from "day one", and Ray advocates the "traditional" approach of a foundation in the forms, drills, and possibly sparring before going out to "challenge" practitioners of other arts.

Correct me if my impressions are wrong.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Hi Terrence. Don't get too worked up it's bad for your heart.

**I'm not worked up, just making my point. Nonfighters who see folks "move" or "touch hands" may be impressed; fighters that see the same thing, because of their experience fighting, will not be impressed. FWIW, you could replace CXW with just about any "name" in WCK or any other nonfighting "master"; they can't have good fighting skill simply because to get it they must fight (and if they don't, they'll never increase their fighting performance).

It's only a discussion. For me I have seen people from both camps who can fight. There is no doubt about what you are saying will produce a good ring fighter. However you negate all fighters from any Kung Fu style, Silat style or whatever who don't train in a boxing ring or train BJJ. I would love to see you fight someone from each of these arts and tell them to their face that they can't fight.

**The venue, ring or cage or alley or gym, may change our fighting tactics but the core fighting skills remain the same -- and if you've never fought to develop them you won't have them regardless of the venue.

Also I love to see you and Ernie and Andrew fight Chen XiaoWang. In fact there are maybe some better Tai Chi fighters in the South but I trust Chen XiaoWang can do a good job on you. You have never tried to fight him and so it's easy to spout a lot of hot air like that. I can beat Mike Tyson as well and of course the dry land swimmer Chen XiaoWang.

**You can "trust" all you want -- that's what nonfighters do well, btw. I don't need trust; I believe my eyes. ;) There is a huge difference between Tyson and Shamrock (who you mentioned before) and CXW; the former fight, the latter doesn't. I would make no claims about the former as they have real fighting skill. And face it, CXW would never fight anyone (insert WCK master name here too), because if he did everyone would see his lack of fighting skill and he wouldn't be able to make a living with his seminars. The difference with MMAist, BJJist, boxers, wrestlers, kyokushinkai, muay thai, etc, is that all these folks fight from the get go (that's why they develop fighting skill) and have no compunction about stepping up at any moment (the sign, btw, of someone that has skill -- they have no problem showing it); everyone knows they can fight, have seen them fight, etc. whereas the "nonfighting masters of fighting" have never fought (certainly no one with any significant level of skill), don't fight, but want to show you their deadly skill via forms and drills. And the nonfighters eat it up.

----------------------------------

KJ wrote:

We are indeed from different planets.

**No. The only reason folks can believe (and it is belief since you have not seen him fight) CXW can fight is they buy into the notion that someone can significantly increase their fighting performance ability without fighting. But if one genuinely practices a martial art (training to become a better fighter) they'll see the point of my claim about CXW -- it's a no-brainer -- that to increase their performance in any physical activity to a significant degree requires one actually do the activity. Go ask *anyone* that really fights as part of their training whether they could beat someone who never fights but only does forms and drills and they'll tell you the same thing.

---------------------------------

Edmund wrote:

All this talk about who can kick who's @ss is a joke.

**It was meant to make a point and nothing more.

No WC people train at a professional enough level to even talk about pro fighting.

**It's not so simple a distinction between pro and everything else. I train with some pro NHB fighters; I've also trained with some pro thai boxers. I know WCK people that train against pro cage fighters, NHBers, thai boxers, etc.

Learn from the pros first hand. In Muay Thai/kickboxing, AFAIK Thailand, Japan and to a far lesser extent China have a truly professional industry. Go there and ACTUALLY learn rather than perpetuate the bum fighting industry. Western countries don't quite have the same level of professionalism in kickboxing but it's growing.

**The western countries seem to be doing OK in vale tudo/NHB events, and don't see the thai's dominating. I'd say Randy Couture is a pro ;)

Regards,

Terence

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

That wouldn't mean anything because I don't claim to be anything. But Chen XiaoWang claims to be a master and Terrence claims he can beat him. So that's why this would be a good match. I want to see the soft internal beat the hard external like all the books say.

**Internal/external are labels that nonfighters use.

---------------------
CFT wrote:

My impression from the posts already made in this thread is that both Ray and Terrence agree on actually using WCK to fight, as opposed to doing forms ad nauseum; the major contention is the time frame. By "fight", I am "redefining" this to mean someone outside of your own school.

**Fighting is an environment where you face genuinely resisting opponents that are really trying to defeat you, take your head off, etc. In school, out of school, anywhere.

Terrence is advocating for pretty much from "day one", and Ray advocates the "traditional" approach of a foundation in the forms, drills, and possibly sparring before going out to "challenge" practitioners of other arts.

Correct me if my impressions are wrong.

**The "traditional" approach isn't IMO all that "traditional" -- except that it is the approach favored by nonfighters. All the good WCK ancestors "went out and tested it for themselves" (Yip's words); that's why they became good. But you are correct that I advocate fighting as a regular part of one's training, and from the very beginning. The "challenge" is btw of oneself not others.

Regards,

Terence

[CFT]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
**The "traditional" approach isn't IMO all that "traditional" -- except that it is the approach favored by nonfighters. All the good WCK ancestors "went out and tested it for themselves" (Yip's words); that's why they became good.Again, I think it is just the timeframe that is at issue. Ray's example of the Hung style fighters was that they did go out and fight, but only after years (I guess) of forms and drills - I don't think he mentioned much about sparring within the school(s).

But you are correct that I advocate fighting as a regular part of one's training, and from the very beginning. The "challenge" is btw of oneself not others.I absolutely agree. Even just sparring within the club, I find that it is a million miles from forms and drills. I'm getting hit a lot, but I hope that I am making progress albeit at a slow rate.

[t_niehoff]

Let me just add (to respond to an offlist email):

I'm not suggesting that CXW can't teach tai ji -- certainly he has the tai ji method (forms, drills, oral tradition). Those don't, however, confer fighting skill; they are prep work. Fighting skill (skill in using the method) is individual and comes from fighting.

No one would suggest that someone that has never boxed would be (or could be) a good boxer or someone that never wrestled would be (or could be) good wrestler or someone that never rolled would (or could be) be a good BJJist (though they may know the forms, drills, and oral tradition of their methods) -- because it is understood that "good" means being able to actually fight with your fighting method. "Good" is a performance-based judgment. So how can one say CXW is "good" -- that is, can fight with his method -- if we've never seen him fight (perform), and he never fought (performed) as part of his training? Folks do that by looking at how he "moves" in cooperative demonstration and how well he is able to do certain drills ("push hands") and infer that those will transfer to fighting ("he's great at that, so he must be able to fight"). It doesn't work like that and folks that have fighting experience, particularly against skilled folks, recognize that.

One of the "best" examples of the "great masters from the past" (and I think you can find this on the web) is the video of the famous tai ji vs. white crane (?) "fight". These are the type of "masters" that folks revere with "stories" about how great they were. But when we see them, we see that they had very little fighting skill. It's no reflection on them personally (they may have been wonderful people) or their fighting methods: it is a reflection on their training.

Regards,

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Bloody right. Because it (Wing Chun) hasn't technically got enough to survive in the ring. It's as plain as day that most WC people aren't skilled in enough. Poor defence against kicks in a kickboxing match? What the hell did they think would happen? This is a technical weakness."
(Edmund)

And this comes from Yongchun - on the very first post on this thread:

"Terrence has stated that there are fighters and non-fighters and that’s all. I tend to agree with that. However I put those who do chi sau, drills and forms in the same category as those who put on protection and spar or those who roll around on rubber mats all day long in the same category."

Chi sao, drills, forms - all train a system that specializes in a close-quarter hand striking system with some close quarter kicking (that's used sparingly)...it's mainly striking at close range...some sweeps...some arm/wristlocking...but at the end of the day...

it's mainly a close quarter hand striking system.

The systems in question on this thread other than Wing Chun (Muay-Thai, BJJ, Kickboxing)...are systems that use a different fighting emphasis (ie.- BJJ is almost exclusively a groundgrappling system...Muay-Thai - though it does include fighting in the clinch (elbows and knees)...still maintains a different emphasis than Wing Chun...kickboxing is ususally a longer range type of fight than Wing Chun, etc...etc...

and these systems (other than wing chun) emphasize sparring, grappling, fighting as a major part of the training from almost day one (throw in Kyokushin as well).

And the "technical weaknesses" of Wing Chun can only be corrected/updated through competition...ie. hard sparring/fighting on a regular basis. (And some wc people/systems have kept up with the competition...have made adaptations to successfully counter kickers, for example...have brought more light-on-the-feet footwork to the table - in recent years/decades).

But many still cling to the idea that "classical" wing chun (for lack of a better term)...needs no adaptations...needs no hard sparring...needs no fighting in competitions...but rather, chi sao, forms, and drills are enough.

Enough for what?

For fighting in yesterday's world? Or today's world?

Chi sao, forms, wc drills, etc...CAN add much to the arsenal of a good fighter...but more is required...including frequent hard sparring/fighting...as well as some adaptations/additions to the classical program...to cover the other fighting ranges and points of emphasis (ie. - let's see you get to the close quarter hand-striking range and stay there long enough to finish the job against a skilled NHB/MMA fighter...Mr. classical wing chun - while limiting yourself to just using the old strategies, training methods, and footwork from the past).

Time to grow - and that has to include frequent hard contact sparring...as well as some crosstraining in styles that emphasize other fighting ranges and strategies.

[Vajramusti]

FWIW-

1. I dont see the relevance of injecting CXW in the discussion.He does not do wing chun.... and I dont think that he would be interested in fighting Terence. His context would be Terence who?
His moves unlike most taichi folks are powerful and not just in appearance and demo.He has impeccable timing.

BTW I have seen him put a big guy down on his face and could have broken the guy's shoulder if he wanted to. The guy wanted to see what CXW could do for real and CXW ageed to it on that occasion. Several years ago in Germany someone attacked him from behind. A classic Chen elbow to the guy's sternum sent the guy to the hospital with heart fibrillation.
If you dont like first rate Chen taiji its ok. Why drag him into this silly discussion and chest pounding?

Tyson, Lennox Lewis, and so many others wouldnt fight any of the vociferous members of this list either. The vociferous list folks couldnt put up enough money- except engaging in sarcasm and usual xxxxchat. There wouldnt be enough money for Tyson in his prime to fight one of the Gracies. They (Tyson and co) ignored a Royce challenge-do ya think it was out of fear. In the common lingo of the forum-get real. Tyson has gone downhill in his skills
and like Joe Louis to make a buck may be available for caricature grappling shows

I havent seen much of Mike Sigman on the net lately and I have not gone to rec.ma in along long time..but Mike asa chen stylist
can and did appear at people's doors if challenged. Chen style can be used for fighting- but I prefer wing chun.

2. Why not take all these fighting discussions to the reality fighting section of kfo? there is darnn little discussion of wing chun
here anyhow. There are wing chun people who "spar" and have fought- and yes against resisting opponents from other styles.

People who test their abilities in "real" events dont always come on chat lists and they get nothing out of a mag story.

On the list there seems to be an assumption at times that the forum captures all wing chun activities in the discussions. We are taken in by all the media marketing associated with various sporting contests.

BTW Seven Star or Gene or Sandman- for a kung fu forum there is surprisingly little discussions of the details of various kung fu styles. Top quality jook lum teachers dont contribute to the southern forum.
Top level taiji teachers dont contribute to the taiji forum. The general forum has discussions on every conceivable chit chat- not much kung fu there either.

In the atmosphere of mass media and mass socirty, --- wing chun, taichi, various southern and northern arts have spread with uneven quality control and displaced by sporting events involving many able athletes. Now comparing good CMA with sporting events is an apples and oranges kind of comparison.

There is a big difference between top quality and average quality
teaching and skill development in CMA and most people are unwilling to spend the quality time and effort in a specific CMA....which is ok.But it is plain silly to engage in chest pounding
and comparing activities without a common analytical framework.
And short of a real all styles beimo among the best- never has happened and never will (money)--- all we do is "analysis" and that rather badly IMO.

Real duels are illegal and what we often do is simulation of fighting real or verbal. Some simulations look more real than others.

In knife fighting discussions for instance - how many Gurkhas with real experience come on board to chit chat. In reality discussions how many real "OZ" survivors come on board to participate in these keyboard discussions.

Upping the level of analysis rather than chest beating and noise is what constructive forums can do.

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I'm not suggesting that CXW can't teach tai ji -- certainly he has the tai ji method (forms, drills, oral tradition). Those don't, however, confer fighting skill; they are prep work. Fighting skill (skill in using the method) is individual and comes from fighting.

.
.
.

"Good" is a performance-based judgment. So how can one say CXW is "good" -- that is, can fight with his method -- if we've never seen him fight (perform), and he never fought (performed) as part of his training?


You acknowledged his method ... you acknowledged that it's prep work ... he can indeed be "good" in that much [and is].


Folks do that by looking at how he "moves" in cooperative demonstration and how well he is able to do certain drills ("push hands") and infer that those will transfer to fighting ("he's great at that, so he must be able to fight"). It doesn't work like that and folks that have fighting experience, particularly against skilled folks, recognize that.

You consistently oversimplify. It is more than "look" and "drills." I think we are both aware there is more to be gained from "feel" than from appearance or mechanical repetitions.

I think you'd furthermore have a hard time convincing those who've been injured from his "gentle playing around" (and there have been those, FWIW) that he has no skill transferrable to fighting. Because you weren't there or have knowledge of his [or others'] every movement and experience doesn't negate them.

I don't know all of what he's done or experienced in private, and I doubt you do either. To my mind, you make a lot of large leaps and generalizations for convenience of your arguments (about CXW and just about everyone else). Unfortunately, these kinds of non-validated assumptions seem to comprise a large part in your arguments which are occasionally interesting in other respects.

The same reservations to your arguments apply to others in Wing Chun, not just CXW or those in other MAs.

FWIW and IMHO, the previous statement about kicking his @$$ was an inappropriate thing to write, on about a dozen levels. I realize that you pride yourself in being provocative, and that such concerns are more in my purview.

On a more practical and substantive level, you have yet to explain to the audience your superior method of connecting Wing Chun "drills" and "techniques" to "real fighting" (reference your post and my subsequent questions on the What level are you? (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32811) thread).

It would also be enlightening to hear more specifics about your and your students' successes as a result of superior training methods.

Regards,
- kj

[Edmund]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
---------------------------------

Edmund wrote:

All this talk about who can kick who's @ss is a joke.

**It was meant to make a point and nothing more.

No WC people train at a professional enough level to even talk about pro fighting.

**It's not so simple a distinction between pro and everything else. I train with some pro NHB fighters; I've also trained with some pro thai boxers. I know WCK people that train against pro cage fighters, NHBers, thai boxers, etc.

Learn from the pros first hand. In Muay Thai/kickboxing, AFAIK Thailand, Japan and to a far lesser extent China have a truly professional industry. Go there and ACTUALLY learn rather than perpetuate the bum fighting industry. Western countries don't quite have the same level of professionalism in kickboxing but it's growing.

**The western countries seem to be doing OK in vale tudo/NHB events, and don't see the thai's dominating. I'd say Randy Couture is a pro ;)

Regards,

Terence

No. You haven't trained with pros unless you've trained in a country where they have a healthy professional fighting industry. America in Muay Thai and NHB is nowhere near the level of professionalism that is in Thailand and Japan. Especially Muay Thai. NHB is not at that level either. They have bouts every day of week in Bangkok at either of the 2 main stadiums or the local TV station where the best bouts are held. It's a true profession somewhat like being a horseracing jockey.

It's got nothing to do with who they beat. If you went to Thailand and went to see who the best were, you'd already know why. They are the home of Muay Thai and the authorities on it. All the technical bouts that Thai's consider the best are from fighters under 120lbs. How are they going to enter the fat-arse UFC or even kickboxing in fat America? If you haven't been there, you haven't seen the best.

Their training methods are distinct and actually don't involve that much sparring because the Thai's understand that it would injure their fighters too much. They fight too often for hard sparring. They "spar" with the pad holder. The pad holder will kick and punch them but the pads are the targets not the holder. And they don't brawl with the pad holder. They are guided so the pad holder should be a skilled teacher.

Even the best Thai fights themselves are NOT "trying to take each others heads off" style fights. Because they are too evenly matched to do overcommitted brawling. It's very much a points battle with very technical skills. The judging in Thailand is based on clean technique not who does the most damage. If you watch, 75-80% of a Muay Thai bout is close range fighting. Clinching, kneeing, elbowing, & throwing. My Thai trainer said exactly the same thing. It's not that much kicking or punching.

Like I said: Go to the real pros. You'll learn more.

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
KJ wrote:

We are indeed from different planets.

**No. The only reason folks can believe (and it is belief since you have not seen him fight) CXW can fight is they buy into the notion that someone can significantly increase their fighting performance ability without fighting. But if one genuinely practices a martial art (training to become a better fighter) they'll see the point of my claim about CXW -- it's a no-brainer -- that to increase their performance in any physical activity to a significant degree requires one actually do the activity. Go ask *anyone* that really fights as part of their training whether they could beat someone who never fights but only does forms and drills and they'll tell you the same thing.


I don't know who you are talking to, but it obviously isn't me.

Regards,
- kj

[Ernie]

edmund,[[Their training methods are distinct and actually don't involve that much sparring because the Thai's understand that it would injure their fighters too much. They fight too often for hard sparring. They "spar" with the pad holder. The pad holder will kick and punch them but the pads are the targets not the holder. And they don't brawl with the pad holder. They are guided so the pad holder should be a skilled teacher.]]]





first off good post , I have experienced the difference in a boxing level from guys the box and pro's

there a world apart , and they train more on attribute [ keeping there tools sharp ] light work ,conditioning work and a lot of mitt work

which leads me to what you wrote

when I trained in MT this is how I was shown , when I trained in boxing / savate when ever I went to do some private training with any one that was a pro or worked with them this is the method of training they used

this mitt feeder method is something I do allot of in my coaching and am still developing ways to use it in Wing Chun development

I’m not talking about just holding up a mitt and having people hit it , but flowing moving punching kicking , clinch , kicks elbows knees and take downs and finishing on the ground with kicks knees and kicks

giving different reads , broken rhythm ,slipping out , jamming them , making things rough so they can feel there way though and deliver with power and clarity

as far as prep work goes this is a great tool , and it test people's endurance balance and adaptability .

I always wondered why more people didn't incorporate it in the WC training ,

now it is very demanding on the part of the coach you have to be fit enough to feed this type of energy to a few guys in a row , and it will take a toll on your body , trust me I know

but far less the days when I would have to hard core spar everything

oh well just wanted to highlight on something you said that has been true in my observations as well and I have personally seen great results form this training with minimal injuries


back to my daddy can kick you daddy Ass

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
2. Why not take all these fighting discussions to the reality fighting section of kfo? there is darnn little discussion of wing chun
here anyhow. There are wing chun people who "spar" and have fought- and yes against resisting opponents from other styles.

My guess is that WC guys are interested in how WC would handle such training, situations, etc. As yongchun stated, he's interested in hearing different people's experiences. There are more WC guys here than anywhere else on the forum, so naturally, he will post his topic here.

People who test their abilities in "real" events dont always come on chat lists and they get nothing out of a mag story.

depends on the definition of "real" several people on the forum - merryprankster, shaolintiger00, suntzu, musicalkatachamp, myself, evolutionfist, mutant warrior, khun khao, shooter's students, etc. compete in various things from mma to san shou, just not on a professional level.

BTW Seven Star or Gene or Sandman- for a kung fu forum there is surprisingly little discussions of the details of various kung fu styles. Top quality jook lum teachers dont contribute to the southern forum.

Top level taiji teachers dont contribute to the taiji forum. The general forum has discussions on every conceivable chit chat- not much kung fu there either.

The open forum is the catch all - it's for everything, as there is no general forum. The ORA is another catch all, but is not as popular, so most posts go through the main forum. The southern forum is pretty much always on topic, as are the other forums. As for the quality of some of the poster's threads or the skill level of people on this forum, we can't help that. Another thing to mention is that the forums are used by more than just CMA. I for example train bjj, judo and thai boxing. I no longer train CMA. There are several judoka, mma, bjj guys and karateka here as well. Naturally, the topics will stray from merely kung fu. Also, you have the "converts" and the guys who cross train with other styles. KFM is quite diverse. It's original intention may have been for cma only discussion, but it's grown into more than that.


In the atmosphere of mass media and mass socirty, --- wing chun, taichi, various southern and northern arts have spread with uneven quality control and displaced by sporting events involving many able athletes. Now comparing good CMA with sporting events is an apples and oranges kind of comparison.

What happened to the quality control? Don't you think that some form of competition would help keep everything in check? some way to verify claims people make?

In knife fighting discussions for instance - how many Gurkhas with real experience come on board to chit chat. In reality discussions how many real "OZ" survivors come on board to participate in these keyboard discussions.

Upping the level of analysis rather than chest beating and noise is what constructive forums can do.

Once again, we have no control over who posts. We don't send out invitations to certain masters or anything of the sort. there are some people here and there though, for example, shuai chiao master john wang posted here for a short time last year.

[KingMonkey]

Their training methods are distinct and actually don't involve that much sparring because the Thai's understand that it would injure their fighters too much. They fight too often for hard sparring. They "spar" with the pad holder. The pad holder will kick and punch them but the pads are the targets not the holder. And they don't brawl with the pad holder. They are guided so the pad holder should be a skilled teacher.

Edmund, as Ernie alluded to this sort of training method is no great secret and quite widespread in the boxing/mma world.
Although you are certainly right to say that you need to be skilled to hold the focus mitts and feed the other guy properly.

[Vajramusti]

Seven Star sez: (Cooments in brackets)

BTW Seven Star or Gene or Sandman- for a kung fu forum there is surprisingly little discussions of the details of various kung fu styles. Top quality jook lum teachers dont contribute to the southern forum.

Top level taiji teachers dont contribute to the taiji forum. The general forum has discussions on every conceivable chit chat- not much kung fu there either.

As for the quality of some of the poster's threads or the skill level of people on this forum, we can't help that.

((Help that? Depends on whether the forums are intended to deal with volume or quality. Same for publications- I understand the market considerations involved))

It's original intention may have been for cma only discussion, but it's grown into more than that.

((Or imo- less than that))




What happened to the quality control?

((Not much there- in a public way... in many activities-except fpr NFL, some top level boxing and sporting activities-yes))

Don't you think that some form of competition would help keep everything in check? some way to verify claims people make?

(((The key factor is money for these things. Unless money or principle (family survival. personal self edfense) is involved why would competent people waste their times- specially with some of the verbally aggressive and vocal list participants? The development of martial skill has often been for the most part a solitary enterprise. TKD and co are ok are ok for large group drils- army training in some places etc.))



Upping the level of analysis rather than chest beating and noise is what constructive forums can do.

Once again, we have no control over who posts.

((In part yes- which accounts for the dowbslides in levels of conversations. I appreciate the time that volunteer moderators give to the forums....but moderators can raise the level of conersations too- more so than has been the case))

We don't send out invitations to certain masters or anything of the sort.
((Understandable. Most dont bother with forums and chit chat. Top level boxing trainers and coaches dont appear in boxing chats either. For the most part there is just careless shooting the breeze- that cumulatively adds to the ignorance of a lot of people on a variety of skilled activities. But they help pay the bills for events, and mags and movies))

there are some people here and there though, for example, shuai chiao master john wang posted here for a short time last year.

(The shuai choa master made a brief appearance and was criticized at first- people didnt know what they had. There was an apology- then the guy disappeared. Sometimes whena competent person makes a remark it can sound trivial or even wrong without decent tacit knowledge about the subject or the experience of the commentator.

In sports the devlopment of excellence and testing continues.
No such parallel exists in the martial arts-

People involved in real fights with real damage are not likely to jabber much in public- in our era of civil and criminal litigation and charges.

So the search for truly first rate CMA teachers- not sports, wushu
etc requires great efforts on the part of students.

Most will (and probably should) stick to sports and vicariously get their martial jollies and virtual realities.))

Gotta go away for a while. Cheers.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Edmund
No. You haven't trained with pros unless you've trained in a country where they have a healthy professional fighting industry.

Not true. A professional is a professional. You fight? you get paid for it? you qualify. UFC and other venues are indeed professional venues. As with anything else, quality of some pros may differ, but they are pro nontheless. As for mma, you want to look at brazil, not japan...

Their training methods are distinct and actually don't involve that much sparring because the Thai's understand that it would injure their fighters too much. They fight too often for hard sparring. They "spar" with the pad holder. The pad holder will kick and punch them but the pads are the targets not the holder. And they don't brawl with the pad holder. They are guided so the pad holder should be a skilled teacher.

the difference here is that they fight like once a week. Those who don't need to spar. It's not uncommon for someone in thailand to have over 50 fights by the time they are 20. Naturally, they wouldn't spar. Some of them fight more than other MA even spar...

even the best Thai fights themselves are NOT "trying to take each others heads off" style fights. Because they are too evenly matched to do overcommitted brawling. It's very much a points battle with very technical skills. The judging in Thailand is based on clean technique not who does the most damage. If you watch, 75-80% of a Muay Thai bout is close range fighting. Clinching, kneeing, elbowing, & throwing. My Thai trainer said exactly the same thing. It's not that much kicking or punching.

the first round is usually to feel eachother out - see what their opponent is like. The fight gets more intense as the rounds progress. Knees and elbows cause more pain than punches. Also, thai fighting is big on people response - the crowd likes knees. The crowd likes varied skills.

Like I said: Go to the real pros. You'll learn more.

I don't disagree that you will learn more in thailand than in the us. However, even in the us, those who fight will learn more about fighting than those who don't.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by KingMonkey
Edmund, as Ernie alluded to this sort of training method is no great secret and quite widespread in the boxing/mma world.
Although you are certainly right to say that you need to be skilled to hold the focus mitts and feed the other guy properly.


King M

Then perhaps we can salvage this discussion ,
--focus mitt and pad/ bag work and who it benefits or does not benefit wing Chun training
= how to feed the mitts ?
= how to work it progressively into a live enviroment
= how to work the pads / bags

a lot of arguments here have been on the benefits on fighting or what ever definition one may have for that .
for some it just is a natural progression , just makes sense
some are into the competitive expression of themselves
others need steps [ prep work to quote T ] I believe in this prep work ,
you need to guide some one safely into a higher pressure environment
or else they get nothing out of it , the just go ape $hit and get hurt

perhaps we can build a bridge between the camps in the same way we build a progression towards more pressure
so we have our basic foundation down , the forms structure and chi sau program is running along smoothly ,
next step getting them to hit and feel and react under more pressure with balanced power and footwork .
so we insert focus mitt work they can go all out [ sort of ] and feel what it’s like to fire at that intensity and as the feeder slips moves , sends hands and legs back in a controlled fashion the person training has to adjust and flow , since it’s really one sided he can just work on his skill .

what are your thoughts

I know of a few wing chun systems that [ feed hands ] we by the senior feeds hand and tells the junior how to respond and later says nothing just puts up hands and lets the person do there thing , this would be a live coaching situation , just insert mitts and turn up the intensity and be creative .


Well thought I would toss it out there

[old jong]

Mits and pads are great training devices for.....Boxing,JKD,Muay Thai and other similar things.

[Vajramusti]

Mitts and pads can have some secondary usage in wc training....if one knows what to do with them.

For training wing chun folks for sporting contests- their value increases.

Context of the wing chun activity involves adjustments.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by old jong
Mits and pads are great training devices for.....Boxing,JKD,Muay Thai and other similar things.


so Jong you don't see a need for them in traditional wing chun
from what i gather could you explain what you see as a negitive
and remember this is not for developing chi sau reflexes but just releaseing and feeling power as you flow with out injuring people

letting go of your power while your being pressured by the coach

all the wing chun hands are in play not jab cross hook

and this is not a replacement of chi sau but another progressive training aid


so fire away big guy

[old jong]

could you explain what you see as a negitive

It is not (IMO) about seeing these things as "negative" I see these things as useless for developping Wing Chun skill. It is like learning to play the guitar but using a piano to do it!...But,if you have times to spend!....;)

[captain]

there MUST be someone on here that can vouch for wc being good.someone who has experience enough to boost the low moral.
R

[Vajramusti]

Captain-
I have been vouching for quite some time- and some others too.

Morale? varies extensively depending on who you talk to..
mine is high!!

[YongChun]

Originally posted by CFT
My impression from the posts already made in this thread is that both Ray and Terrence agree on actually using WCK to fight, as opposed to doing forms ad nauseum; the major contention is the time frame. By "fight", I am "redefining" this to mean someone outside of your own school.

Terrence is advocating for pretty much from "day one", and Ray advocates the "traditional" approach of a foundation in the forms, drills, and possibly sparring before going out to "challenge" practitioners of other arts.

Correct me if my impressions are wrong.

That's correct. I agree with Terrences stuff but not in his time frame because it produces crap.

Ray

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
FWIW-In knife fighting discussions for instance - how many Gurkhas with real experience come on board to chit chat. In reality discussions how many real "OZ" survivors come on board to participate in these keyboard discussions.

Upping the level of analysis rather than chest beating and noise is what constructive forums can do.

Very good post Joy. I was going to ask you how do the Gurkhas train? They are world famous for their knife fighting skills as everyone should know.

Ray

[PaulH]

A good WC punch/strike has 4 qualities in general:
1. Power
2. Stability
3. Precision/Timing
4. Speed

The precision and timing depends heavily on feeling, a certain maturity of how a good punch should be done, and lot of experience. In this context, the mitt and focus pads as a modern way to cultivate this attribute fit in nicely with the WC training. I've been taking notes on Ernie's training with his trainees. So far, they all improve remarkably on how they deliver their attacks with respect to the 4 points above.

I'm used to train with mitts/gloves years ago also, but it's nothing as sophisticated like the way Ernie did it. The only drawback I see is this method depends heavily on an experienced coach who can coach you.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"It is not (IMO) about seeing these things (focus mitt and pad/bag work) as 'negative'. I see these things as useless for developing Wing Chun skill."
(Old Jong)

How could these things be useless?

Wing chun punching, palm strikes, kicks, etc. don't need to be sharpened to a high intensity of power, speed, and precision?

Or are you going to say that Wooden Dummy training does that? If so...the Wooden dummy doesn't move and react the way a live training partner/feeder would move and react.

And doing these things against a live "opponent" (the feeder)...who sticks and moves...feeds an arm/takes it away...throws high, low, high...in and out...side to side - does the same with kicks or knee strikes...

these things wouldn't help a wing chun fighter?

But somehow they help a Muay-Thai fighter? Or a kickboxer? Does this make any sense?

Where is Wing Chun from? Some other planet?

[old jong]

Originally posted by old jong
It is not (IMO) about seeing these things as "negative" I see these things as useless for developping Wing Chun skill. It is like learning to play the guitar but using a piano to do it!...But,if you have times to spend!....;)

Here is the complete post. It is my own opinion and I understand your's must be different.

[black and blue]

:eek:

If you don't hit pads, and don't spar and hit each other, and don't fight and hit people for real.... what the heck are you guys hitting... other than air.

[old jong]

Yes!...And we beat the **** out of that air!...

[black and blue]

So, in short, you and Joy kick airse!

:rolleyes:

[Ultimatewingchun]

Until it becomes a lot of hot air?

Just blowing smoke, are you?!

[Ernie]

Ok fellows slow down before this turns into the usual if you don’t spar you suck and if you spar you not doing wing chun thing that seems to be all we do these days =(
Jong
From your experience how would being able to add more contact and pressure to the wing Chun hand flows be negative [ again keeping in mind this is only a supplement to chi sau training ]
- how would tracking the body as it slips moves kicks and tries to rush and tackle as well as clinch , while your training to flow adapt and hit with good solid power yet be adaptable enough to change and interrupt as the feeder changes lines off attack and weapons .
- the idea here being quick termination and feeling on a physical and emotional level how to release balanced power , seeing a person change in a non wing chun body style feed , sight recognition , lines of attack that are not wing chun style so you can learn to adapt to things other then wing chun attacks
- learning to focus on the man instead of the style by being in an environment that the feeder has free reign to fire or controlled counter with anything
- or you can just use it to further cultivate the explosiveness and routing under pressure of your own power of the wing chun hands


what drills or training would you use to supplement the skill development that this higher pressure and target adaptability would develop .

so were not talking about sparring , just drilling with impact

[black and blue]

Hey, don't make fun of them! :mad:

These guys have wicked forms and mad-crazy Chi Sau skills.






:(

I never hope for anyone to be mugged... but with these guys, I pray it never happens.

"You wanna take my wallet, eh? Yeah, just try and take it whilst avoiding my arms as I go through the SNT set!!!!"

:p

[Ultimatewingchun]

Not to worry, Ernie. Just having some fun at (Old Jong) Michel's expense! He can take it.

Seriously though...this is a good thread; and as I see it, rhetoric aside - your points about supplementing wing chun drilling with pads/mitt/bag work with a live feeder is a good one.

And the more detail you give about the nature and the benefits of the drills - the more it should be becoming obvious that this is a good idea. Good for a wing chun fighter's skill and attribute development. Along with the usual stuff (ie. - the importance of hard sparring/fighting).

In fact - this quote from not long ago on this thread is very telling, imo; wherein Ray (YongChun) responds back to CFT..........................

Originally posted by CFT
"My impression from the posts already made in this thread is that both Ray and Terrence agree on actually using WCK to fight, as opposed to doing forms ad nauseum; the major contention is the time frame. By 'fight', I am 'redefining' this to mean someone outside of your own school.

Terrence is advocating for pretty much from 'day one', and Ray advocates the 'traditional' approach of a foundation in the forms, drills, and possibly sparring before going out to 'challenge' practitioners of other arts.

Correct me if my impressions are wrong."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



"That's correct. I agree with Terrences stuff but not in his time frame because it produces crap."

Ray

.................................................. .

So Ray seems to be saying that hard sparring/fighting is a good idea if one really wants to be able to fight with wing chun - but not from day one (as Terence advocates).

I agree with Ray on this - and you said earlier on the thread (if I remember correctly) that you agree also.

Don't know if Ray really means that - but he said it.

In any event - getting past the rhetoric - the answer really seems to be ALL OF THE ABOVE.

After a reasonable (but not too lengthy) amount of time - as a Wing Chun practitioner - and the basics have been covered...SLT, drills, and a fair amount of chi sao has been learned...and the basics of wing chun theory, footwork, punching, kicking, etc. are being done...

it should become time to start working at a higher gear - against a resisting opponent...step-by-step.... up the ladder of spontaneous light sparring - adding more and more moves as time goes on - and into hard sparring...bag/mitt/pad work, etc.

What is not too lengthy? Each will have a time frame of their own, that they think is best. For me - a new student should at the very least be doing some light sparring drills (starting with isolation drills) within 8-10 months - and spontaneous contact sparring with protective equipment within 1.5 years.

But that doesn't mean that the chi sao, drills, forms, etc. end.

On the contrary - they never end. One must keep returning to these things to sharpen what you know and to discover/learn new things that come from the wing chun system that you didn't cover yet.

But I'm preaching to the choir - I know that you know.

[old jong]

Ernie.
I sometimes use pads for checking my students progress in punching. They all progress naturaly and at their own paces with Wing Chun methods.I don't feel the need to add JKD or Muay Thai methods. You feel free to do whatever you want. ;)

B&B
:rolleyes:

[black and blue]

OJ

:o... good luck with your classes. You teach WCK as self defense? LOL

[Vajramusti]

B and B sez:


I never hope for anyone to be mugged... but with these guys, I pray it never happens.

"You wanna take my wallet, eh? Yeah, just try and take it whilst avoiding my arms as I go through the SNT set!!!!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not to worry- I will distract them by telling them that I have a black and blue brother who makes a mean hungarian ghoulash.
I hope that you can take over from there.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by old jong
Ernie.
I sometimes use pads for checking my students progress in punching. They all progress naturaly and at their own paces with Wing Chun methods.I don't feel the need to add JKD or Muay Thai methods. You feel free to do whatever you want. ;)

B&B
:rolleyes:

Jong ,

why do things have to have labels ?

if a pak sau is practiced one a focus mitt then it is no longer a wing chun pak sau but a jkd pak sau

if your training bridging and closing with impact and you use a mitt for proctection and the ability to do it over and over at power with out injury to the hitter or feeder

then this is jkd ?

then by that logic wing chun needs some jkd


labels are silly they seperate us and prevent us from growing

a pak is a pak , as long as your cultivating the body engine and relaxed power release

the tool you hit should not matter

i don't follow your logic , and i'm not trying to argue or be disrespectful
instead trying to erase some of the [jump to conclusion knee jerk reactions ] that seem to dominate these days

[black and blue]

LOL, Joy

If you'd ever tasted my cooking you'd realize just how deadly it is! :D

I am printing out your last post to show my girlfriend - the poor woman has been subject to more than one attempt on my part to cook "Hungarian style".

Now... back to slagging off Old Jong.... Jong, you are sissy!


And of course, Ernie is correct. Use tools to test. Whatever you do - test what you do. What the heck do you guys do in training (other than punch air and tell each other crazy-fox Yip Man stories)?

:rolleyes: :p

[Ernie]

Big Daddy V :)

have not heard from you in a while hope all is well

got some stuff I want to send you , I have not for got just have some things I need to clean up -------

---- as for the mitts I know it takes a certain amount of skill and endurance to feed the mitts the right way and draw out the skill from the person

not everybody can do this

I’m still working on it , but here is another plus it makes me so much better and more sensitive , I have to be just ahead of the person yet still give him enough substance to feel his shot yet still have the next feed ready

this is hard enough in a boxing format

but add in wing Chun split timing and to handed system things get real scary :D

but you will see how in the beginning people stumble and over commit when they suddenly have to hit hard for real on a target that moves gives different lines

they would have these same problems in the street [ or sparring ] if you want to go that route


in chi sau we become accustom to body postures and lines of attack

but when things get disconnected and the waters get rough things change

this is the prime way to find your chi sau skill in dirty water yet not kill anyone

again it is hard on the coach and if you don’t get the mitt up then you eat a shot , but it’s worth it for me to eat a few shots if my guys get good . plus this aint ballet getting hit is part of the game ,

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun



So Ray seems to be saying that hard sparring/fighting is a good idea if one really wants to be able to fight with wing chun - but not from day one (as Terence advocates).

I agree with Ray on this - and you said earlier on the thread (if I remember correctly) that you agree also.

Don't know if Ray really means that - but he said it..

Yes that's what I mean. Following Terrences model, I doubt if any kind of Eastern Martial arts would have developed. Tai Chi, Hung style, Preying Mantis, aikido, ... all those things take time for the body to absorb. Once absorbed then you can go to the next stage of fighting. If not absorbed all practitioners will turn into standard kickboxers. Some are happy with that and that's fine. I have seen so many people who fight too early and it takes forever to get the stiff, tense approach out. Also they are always easy to beat too.

Ray

[Vajramusti]

in chi sau we become accustom to body postures and lines of attack
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not if you know chi sao in all its manifestations well.

As JR says gotta run--

to hear Nora Jones sing..."Come away with me ...in the night""..
much more interesting than the chest beating on the forum.

[old jong]

Black and blue
I bet you are joking otherwise you would be just plain stupid and a troll.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
in chi sau we become accustom to body postures and lines of attack
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not if you know chi sao in all its manifestations well.

As JR says gotta run--

to hear Nora Jones sing..."Come away with me ...in the night""..
much more interesting than the chest beating on the forum.

Ok then joy lets have your side on training up to full power release while in motion on a non stationary target that is open to none wing chun attack lines ,

How do you develop this skill at this level of pressure with out injury .

There is a difference from hitting and tracking center and taking position in a controlled fashion [ which is a great way to train ] , then hitting releasing the power while a target is evading [ which is a little more honest in application ]

Again not talking about sparring , just trying to maintain structure and proper energy while turning up the intensity and offering [ problems ] unique lines of attack , take downs , clinch what ever you want while running the mitts and getting the heart rate up and the emotions up
Yet still keeping it safe

Again not arguing or saying one is better , just investigating wing chun training methods by different people to address intensity and power , timing ,balance adaptability under organic circumstances

When your done listening to Norah hit me back

You guys want to talk wing chun , then lets talk wing chun , beyond forms and chi sau [ or perhaps with in your chi sau ] the development of wing chun skill under pressure [ not fixed or traditional feed ] being able to problem solve and adapt while maintaining structure and proper body engine


and like you say the devil is in the details , so please be more detailed :D

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun


Sparring with lots of protection gives you a false sense of reality. The Dog brothers are a step closer to reality but according to those Esrimadors who have fought for real, not close enough. Many experienced Dog Bros stick fighters have also fought without any protective gear.




Originally posted by YongChun
Ring fighting is also very different from street fighting. Mixing it up in the ring with your buddies only prepares you for that kind of fighting and makes you comfortable in that realm of play.Ah, the words of someone who has never been in the ring.



Originally posted by YongChun
Real fighting is three guys trying to smash you or stab you with sharpend pipes. If you aren't training for that, then what are you training for? Will working out with boxers help that?And don't you need to practice for this kind of fighting with protective equipment and doesn't that make it "unrealistic"?

[Edmund]

Originally posted by KingMonkey
Edmund, as Ernie alluded to this sort of training method is no great secret and quite widespread in the boxing/mma world.
Although you are certainly right to say that you need to be skilled to hold the focus mitts and feed the other guy properly.


Not quite. I'd make the same distinction that Ernie made.

While the training methods may be mimicked somewhat there's a difference in training styles between pros in Thailand and pros in Western countries like Australia. Mimicking the methods is only the 1st step. By looking at how they do what they do, you refine the skills and see more of the art.

Unless you've been to Thailand, you haven't seen how they do it.
Boxing is not Muay Thai. MMA is not Muay Thai. One look at how the best compete in Thailand and you can see the massive difference in techniques.

If Muay Thai was taught the same way in the West, then it should look close to the same style and it's obvious that it isn't.

As soon as you take the attitude that you've seen it all and know it all, you've failed to learn already. The right approach is to recognise that there is a difference. If they have a distinct skill, then learn it from them.

1st step is to mimic how they train. Next step is to look into the details of their technique - Why they do it certain ways and when to use it in a fight.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by t_niehoff


I'm not suggesting that CXW can't teach tai ji -- certainly he has the tai ji method (forms, drills, oral tradition). Those don't, however, confer fighting skill; Nor do they confer the ability to teach fighting skill.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"In chi sau we become accustomed to body postures and lines of attack

but when things get disconnected and the waters get rough things change

this is the prime way to find your chi sau skill in dirty water yet not kill anyone."
(Ernie)

Give that man a cigar!!! (Good talkin' to ya again. Have been tending to some personal/family business lately. Will be lookin' forward to whatever you're sending!)


The body postures and lines of attack in chi sao pre-suppose a certain fighting range and that contact has been established - with both participants using forward intention...and are purposely maintaining contact.

But as you said - the waters change when there is disconnection. And the further away the disconnection becomes - the more the situation requires a whole different line of training than chi sao.

Does he try to clinch? Back away? Come in for an all-out takedown? Jab low and cross high? Throw a kick at you? While using various broken rhythms and distances? While bobbing and weaving? Moving in and out and from side to side? Are all or some of these things coming off his jab? Does he jab, hook and then shoot for the legs? These are just a few (of many) situations that chi sao - of and by itself - does not address.

But learning how to go through all of this maze to the chi sao "range" - and then do your wing chun thing...without losing balance - eating a punch or a kick...an elbow or a knee - without being outflanked - over committing...and with power on the strikes, etc.

That's the ballgame.

[YongChun]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by YongChun
Sparring with lots of protection gives you a false sense of reality. The Dog brothers are a step closer to reality but according to those Esrimadors who have fought for real, not close enough.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many experienced Dog Bros stick fighters have also fought without any protective gear.

- I would say that's not very smart. It doesn't take much to hit a guy in the temple and kill him. - Ray

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by YongChun
Ring fighting is also very different from street fighting. Mixing it up in the ring with your buddies only prepares you for that kind of fighting and makes you comfortable in that realm of play.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, the words of someone who has never been in the ring.

- You assume too much. I have tried that but not to the extent of Terrence and Ernie but some of the students here probably have fought much more on the street then they have (which of course is also assuming too much). - Ray

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by YongChun
Real fighting is three guys trying to smash you or stab you with sharpend pipes. If you aren't training for that, then what are you training for? Will working out with boxers help that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And don't you need to practice for this kind of fighting with protective equipment and doesn't that make it "unrealistic"?

- I only mentioned this because Terrence always talks about reality but never talks about weapons fighting which to me is closer to reality. The reality isn't a Thai boxer or a BJJ artist beating you up on the street. At least not here. I don't believe really going at each other with baseball bats is the way to train for this reality. I think the Asian cultures know something about weapons training. - Ray

Last edited by Knifefighter on 10-11-2004 at 05:23 PM

The only thing I am saying about reality and learning martial arts is that I think you shouldn't rush through it to quickly get into fighting. Learn your art properly first and then fight. Otherwise, it's like getting thrown into the deep end with no one to help you when you don't yet know anything about swimming. What's the rush anyway? A few years of hard training in the fundamentals of a style isn't going to hurt anyone and might even help. If you want to fight right away then go and learning wrestling, Judo, Fencing or kickboxing or just Mr. tough man contest brawling. If you want to fight with Hung style or Tai Chi or with Aikido then it can't be done in a short period of time. With Wing Chun it is possible to learn to fight more quickly. With the Hong Kong fighters it was about two years but I doubt it was quality Wing Chun whether they won or not. To fight with quality Wing Chun where it doesn't look like kickboxing will also take a lot of time. I don't know how the people who talk about fighting fight. If they dispense with chi sau and forms after a few months and can fight with quality Wing Chun, then I will be very impressed and will teach using that approach as well. So let's have some video clips to see how the real fighters among us fight against the Thais and against BJJ and against someone who knows what he is doing.

When I first learned Wing Chun we all wanted to quickly fight and forget about the forms and chi sau. The result was very crappy stiff, tense and imprecise Wing Chun but we had very fast hands with no short range power capability. Basically we just looked like kickboxers. But we got results. One of our guys beat 5 Karate blackbelts in competition with a crappy form of Wing Chun.

[Edmund]

I sometimes use pads for checking my students progress in punching. They all progress naturaly and at their own paces with Wing Chun methods.I don't feel the need to add JKD or Muay Thai methods. You feel free to do whatever you want.


Hitting pads is just one method. Thai's also practice strikes in the air just like any traditional art.

But working with a pad holder is a really good method. Don't look down on it because it doesn't come from Wing Chun. In this area they have a lot of skill.

You won't be able to do a lot of chi sau because they have to hold the pads but you learn other things.

[Vajramusti]

Ernie sez:







Ok then joy lets have your side on training up to full power release while in motion on a non stationary target that is open to none wing chun attack lines ,

How do you develop this skill at this level of pressure with out injury .


Again not arguing or saying one is better , just investigating wing chun training methods by different people to address intensity and power , timing ,balance adaptability under organic circumstances

When your done listening to Norah hit me back
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norah Jones was superb. Long program including a warm up program, regular program and two encores.
If I understand your phrasing- and I may not,,, but briefly..

1. Without imitating boxing- the wing chun I do has protracted shadow boxing at full power releases with lots of foot work to cut off when needed, stepping in when needed, stepping to the side when needed and engage when ever possible a moving target. The key is the solid but very versatile wing chun footwork.

2. Againsta real wing chun sparring(not boxing) partner one can
use the bodywork learnt in #1 above to attack and defend against a real person on the move.

Note- sustained chi sao teaches the ability to control one's power..
to whatever point it is needed. For all the possible types of punches, palms, elbows, forearms, shoulder and other contact points.Takes a lot of knowkedgeable chi sao training rather than just the not uncommen fast rolling to develop controls in order to minimze wasted movements.
Provided the wing chun footwork and hand skills and timing are properly learned- nothing wrong with repeated punching of
shields moved by someone randomly. Note the word-provided.
All this on top of jong work, wall bag work etc.

All this using wing chun structure and the wing chun engine.

nuff for now= gotta catcha couple of hours shut eye-before a busy day.
a moving target

[Edmund]

Originally posted by YongChun
With Wing Chun it is possible to learn to fight more quickly. With the Hong Kong fighters it was about two years but I doubt it was quality Wing Chun whether they won or not. To fight with quality Wing Chun where it doesn't look like kickboxing will also take a lot of time.


Why would you want to NOT look like kickboxing when it is so clearly effective for a kickboxing match?

All this talk about "WC is for self defence" and the basic stance is vulnerable to a decent kick. If that is called quality, then please call me crappy because that sort of quality hasn't ever worked.
That's why it's so rare! They've all been killed in fights. :P

"Quality" guys in HK got their fantastic selves knocked out last month in Muay Thai.

Now the story has changed and WC ISN'T easy to apply!
Why the hell is everyone in WC telling their prospective students the complete opposite? :)



Originally posted by YongChun

I don't know how the people who talk about fighting fight. If they dispense with chi sau and forms after a few months and can fight with quality Wing Chun, then I will be very impressed and will teach using that approach as well. So let's have some video clips to see how the real fighters among us fight against the Thais and against BJJ and against someone who knows what he is doing.

When I first learned Wing Chun we all wanted to quickly fight and forget about the forms and chi sau. The result was very crappy stiff, tense and imprecise Wing Chun but we had very fast hands with no short range power capability. Basically we just looked like kickboxers. But we got results. One of our guys beat 5 Karate blackbelts in competition with a crappy form of Wing Chun.

I suppose now he's become so much better at WC that he's losing to 5 whitebelts. :) Maybe what you consider crap was actually more effective.

:rolleyes:
Kickboxers move the way that they do for reasons. If you are crappy kickers and you never train against them that much, you don't kick pads, you don't really kick each other: Why would you stick to what you do and ignore why kickboxers (who deal with kicks all the time) choose to do what they do?

Commonsense would be to at least gain an appreciation since it's their area of expertise.

Plenty have tried your classical WC way and not done well.
How many have to lose? They have to change what they do. It's wrong.

[black and blue]

Well, OJ, I hope not stupid, but am interested to hear about your teaching methods and your students drills/work etc outside of form and Chi Sau practice.

Trolling? Dunno. Anyone who seems to question 'light' training is seen to be a troll it would seem.

Look forward to reading your reply, as I enjoyed reading Joys - it paints a better picture of how he trains and why.

You will be pleased to know I won't troll your posts for a least a few days as I'm off on business. Loads to do. Had the pleasure to interview the Hu Prime Minister this morning.... got royally frisked by this security team... should have asked how they trained - a usefull looking bunch of guys!

Many of the Hungarian forces now train in Krav Maga... which was founded by a man of Hungarian origin!

[CFT]

I think a lot of kudos should go to Ernie for turning this back into a constructive thread.

But I have a query for you Ernie. You've been quite detailed in your approach, re: focus mitts and pads, feeding, etc. But I still don't quite see the whole picture.

I can see the benefits of your practice for footwork, finding attacking lines and delivering power on the move, but isn't there a danger of your students developing the habit of chasing hands? But if you position the pads (hands) nearer the body then you're not threatening them so much with your hands.

Great stuff anyway; thanks for sharing.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Yes that's what I mean. Following Terrences model, I doubt if any kind of Eastern Martial arts would have developed. Tai Chi, Hung style, Preying Mantis, aikido, ... all those things take time for the body to absorb.

**No, it doesn't "take time" -- at least not very much time. Any martial art has certain, specific body mechanics. But you can never develop them doing only forms and drills; the mechanics can only be found for oneself from the doing (application).

Once absorbed then you can go to the next stage of fighting. If not absorbed all practitioners will turn into standard kickboxers.

**Kickboxing has its own mechanics too. What you are talking about is that many WCK folks use a "kickboxing model" for how they mistakenly think WCK is applied.

Some are happy with that and that's fine. I have seen so many people who fight too early and it takes forever to get the stiff, tense approach out. Also they are always easy to beat too.

**When was the last time you saw a "stiff, tense" boxer? What fighting does is illustrate and highlight problems like being stiff or tense (and a whole host of others) because if you make those "mistakes" they are easily taken advantage of by someone moderately skilled. The interesting thing is it has been my experience that all these "relaxed and soft" guys who practice chi sao all the time to reinforce that "state" become stiff as a board when they get taken out of the drill and have to really fight. They never learn that all these things are intensity-dependent, and that being able to do them at the low-intensity of chi sao won't help them at the high-intensity of fighting.

Regards,

Terence

[Vajramusti]

B & B sez:((Reposting reply- the other got lost in cyberspace))

You will be pleased to know I won't troll your posts for a least a few days

(((That will take the pressure off from Old Jong- and the list will survive ... in the midst of noise no silence can survive without resisting opponents))

as I'm off on business.

((Others loaf?))



Had the pleasure to interview the Hu Prime Minister this morning....

(( I w ould think it would be a pain. Most PMs have mastered the art of emptiness. One unnamed country just re-elected one from what I hear. ))

got royally frisked by this security team...

((Royally- pity the peasants))

should have asked how they trained -

((Its the goulash- barracks goulash will get you
every time))

a usefull looking bunch of guys!

((Its the Hun-Mongol vitamins with Indian gypsy paprika))

[Ernie]

Originally posted by CFT
I think a lot of kudos should go to Ernie for turning this back into a constructive thread.

But I have a query for you Ernie. You've been quite detailed in your approach, re: focus mitts and pads, feeding, etc. But I still don't quite see the whole picture.

I can see the benefits of your practice for footwork, finding attacking lines and delivering power on the move, but isn't there a danger of your students developing the habit of chasing hands? But if you position the pads (hands) nearer the body then you're not threatening them so much with your hands.

Great stuff anyway; thanks for sharing.

Thanks for the kudos
There have been to many negative post and I have one of the reasons time to flip the script =)

The real danger is of me chasing hands since Instead of hitting I’m placing targets , I keep the hits honest one center , were a boxer will keep his hands to either side , the use more of a twist so that would benefit there power release , but we use square body or ½ triangle body but fire from the elbows and keep it on center . my job is to keep the feed ring in front of my face , my wu sau per say , but the hands I shoot at them can be anything from another wing chun hand to cultivate tight center paks , lops , or boxing shots that might pass center or arch , they need to read the line ,
Every had some one [ non wing chun ] through a sloppy punch and it throws you off for a second since it’s on a strange or unfamiliar angle ? sure we attack center the man not the hands but we are human and can be taken of track , this just give a person more flight time in a feel comfortable attacking the man with power and balance no matter what he tosses out there and to have quick recovery when things don’t go your way

Once I get my helmet then they can really take it to my grill =)
Let them feel what it’s like to hit with pure free power and feel my body fold from the shots so the can track and finish me , I did this many years ago with a old coach of mine and it was very eye opening as far as my ability to follow and finish , since bodies fall different ways some twist and cover , some go into the fetal position some get tight and try and come back at you other duck and shoot the legs , you have to be able to adapt and mold to this a lot of wing chun guys just go ape $hit hitting blindly . they just hit what ever is there top of the head his back shoulder but these are wasted shots , inserting other tools would be more efficient for termination ,
Kicks stomps , knees elbows what ever if you have good target recognition then you don’t have a stall time in your actions or just hit blindly

But that was a great question and I can see how it could easily be perceived that way , but the guy hitting is cultivating forward pressure while moving and maintaining balance not blind hitting but feeling and adapting , his goal is to hit me and hit me hard , my goal is to get that mitt up fast enough to not get knocked out .
I can see why many people may not want to try this , sucks for the coach if things go wrong and things do go wrong =) but I like getting zapped and it dials in my reflexes to after a few rounds of feeding removing the mitts and just playing hands it’s like there moving in slow motion my timing is real crispy

This falls more under the skill under pressure stress over load type of training , it also works you conditioning , every do 3 minutes hitting and moving and getting hit back , definably a work out , but you feel adrenaline dump and fatigue similar to a fighting situation ,

But it’s just a supplemental tool nothing more , one more way to refine your skill and get some impact with out getting injured , well I get injured ha

[Ernie]

Joy
- 1. Without imitating boxing- the wing chun I do has protracted shadow boxing at full power releases with lots of foot work to cut off when needed, stepping in when needed, stepping to the side when needed and engage when ever possible a moving target. The key is the solid but very versatile wing Chun footwork.

--------- that’s great Joy shadow wing chun boxing =) , will cultivate good balance while releasing power , but when hitting a moving changing target there is more recoil and emptiness since energy bounces back at you or shifts while your releasing so you need to be able to feel , dampen or interrupt during the heat of battle , while having target recognition . what would you insert to give them that feeling and experience



Joy
- 2. Against a real wing Chun sparring(not boxing) partner one can
use the bodywork learnt in #1 above to attack and defend against a real person on the move.


--------- again another great drill and starting point , but wing chun with wing chun usually presents a fixed or constant wall of energy both people have structure and have root , there training that way , they tend to be working the same footwork pattern and this can get predictable and they tend to fire the same style weapons on the same lines of attack , this can also get predictable . also with out any protective gear you can’t hit full power this would change the dynamic drastically ,
so how do you compensate for the need of adaptability and stress over load , [ you stated in the original post that good chi sau prepares you for a lot of this just to be fair and I agree to a degree but when the pressure goes way up things tend to change ]


Joy
- All this using wing chun structure and the wing chun engine

----------- Joy I’m right there with you just looking a different and modern ways to gain experience using that engine and releasing that power freely and safely , also this training is not what Gary does , he used the dummy , pole and those vertical mattresses to project people at full power and we free style po pai to po pai to see who can take position and blow the other guy out while he is doing the same thing to you , then we insert hits after the power and structure is clear and balanced , so he found his own creative way , so this stuff is my way of researching different methods nothing more , I’m glad you had a great time at the concert love me some Norah and thank you for taking the time to share in this dialogue

[Vajramusti]

but you feel adrenaline dump and fatigue similar to a fighting situation ,
--------------------------------

Ergo, being around some in laws is a great training regimen.
Results, i say.

Off to work and some adrenaline dump.... as American as apple pie.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
YongChun wrote:

Yes that's what I mean. Following Terrences model, I doubt if any kind of Eastern Martial arts would have developed. Tai Chi, Hung style, Preying Mantis, aikido, ... all those things take time for the body to absorb.

**No, it doesn't "take time" -- at least not very much time. Any martial art has certain, specific body mechanics. But you can never develop them doing only forms and drills; the mechanics can only be found for oneself from the doing (application).


Terence

Then I would say you just don't have experience with Hung style, or with Chen Tai Chi for example. That's why you can't relate to these arts at all. That's also why there are few good exponents of these arts today. They don't put in the time because they are too impatient and only train three days a week. Hung style maybe takes 7 days of training every day for about 5 hours for three years before you are ready to go out and fight and make it look like Hung style. That's from my experience in the 1960's. Tai Chi is probably longer. From experience in both, I know it takes a long time and fighting against boxers doesn't speed up the process at all but slows it down instead.

Ray

[CFT]

Originally posted by Ernie
... but the guy hitting is cultivating forward pressure while moving and maintaining balance not blind hitting but feeling and adapting , his goal is to hit me and hit me hard , my goal is to get that mitt up fast enough to not get knocked out.I bet you're really good at reading the game. Thanks, you've cleared alot of things up for me. The bonus is that YOU also get some benefit out of it too, albeit at a physical (damage) cost.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Then I would say you just don't have experience with Hung style, or with Chen Tai Chi for example. That's why you can't relate to these arts at all.

**My law partner, J. Justin Meehan, is one of the "top" Chen teachers in the US; I've seen CXW, Feng, etc. It has nothing to do with a person's method/style.

That's also why there are few good exponents of these arts today. They don't put in the time because they are too impatient and only train three days a week. Hung style maybe takes 7 days of training every day for about 5 hours for three years before you are ready to go out and fight and make it look like Hung style. That's from my experience in the 1960's. Tai Chi is probably longer. From experience in both, I know it takes a long time and fighting against boxers doesn't speed up the process at all but slows it down instead.

**I guess that explains why there are no Chen fighters or Hung fighters of any note -- they still haven't spent enough time. ;) All that is nonsense, and one would have to be stupid to spend "7 days of training every day for about 5 hours for three years before you are ready to go out and fight ", when there are so many ways to become a better fighter with much less of an investment. Keep buying into the stories, I'll keep focusing on results.

Terence

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun
quote: It doesn't take much to hit a guy in the temple and kill him. I've been in martial arts/combative sports for quite a long time and my conclusion based on my experiences and observations is that the "temple death hit" is largely a myth. Deaths from blows to the head usually occur after a number of cummulative stikes or from a fall where the head impacts against hard concrete or asphalt.

The main danger in stickfighting without head gear is probably the loss of an eye, although I've never heard of that happening either.

:


Originally posted by YongChun
You assume too much. I have tried that but not to the extent of Terrence and Ernie... In which events have you fought?


Originally posted by YongChun
The reality isn't a Thai boxer or a BJJ artist beating you up on the street. BJJ fighters, competitive wrestlers, boxers, MMA fighters, or Muay Thai fighters will probably be some the toughest people you might possibly face. Why not train for the highest common denominator.




Originally posted by YongChun
What's the rush anyway? A few years of hard training in the fundamentals of a style isn't going to hurt anyone and might even help.If one's goal is self-defense, I would think the quicker the better. Five to six months of BJJ, Muay Thai, boxing, or wrestling training can make a person into a somewhat competent fighter.



Originally posted by YongChun
To fight with quality Wing Chun where it doesn't look like kickboxing will also take a lot of time. Most practioners of what I consider to be more realistic fighting systems aren't concerned with how their fighting looks, but, rather how it works. Most BJJ practioners will readily admit that thier system is not pretty and can even look embarasingly gay at times. However, their main objective is to take what works best and use it, regardless of how it "looks".



Originally posted by YongChun
One of our guys beat 5 Karate blackbelts in competition with a crappy form of Wing Chun. If crappy WC beats five karate blackbelts, good WC should be able to beat just about anyone then.

[t_niehoff]

KF,

Good post. The temple shot, along with the eye shot, is largely myth. And of course the idea isn't to train to defeat certain types of fighters (muay thai or bjj or whatever) but to have the skills to deal with a good fighter. As you correctly pointed out, if you can deal with a good fighter (which means you have good fighting skill), then dealing with poor fighters will be just so much easier.

Regards,

Terence

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I'll keep focusing on results.

Terence Couple of questions for you. Obviously, you are in the "cross-training, mix-it-up with other sytles, try new and more efficient training methods" camp.
- What types of cross training have you done?
- Do you spar/train with fighters from other styles?
- In what types of applications do you find your WC to be most and least effective?
- Do you ever compete? If so, in which events?

[t_niehoff]

KF asked:

Couple of questions for you. Obviously, you are in the "cross-training, mix-it-up with other sytles, try new and more efficient training methods" camp.
-
What types of cross training have you done?

**Escrima (pekiti tersia and Insosanto blend), bjj, wrestling (some greco/freestyle), muay thai, boxing . . .

- Do you spar/train with fighters from other styles?

**Yup, as often as I can.

- In what types of applications do you find your WC to be most and least effective?

**WCK's approach is an aggressive, close-quarter approach and that's where I've found it to be most effective. It's not effective staying on the outside (though it provides the means to move from the outside), in a body-to-body clinch, or on the ground.

- Do you ever compete? If so, in which events?

**I'm too old to compete, though I enjoy mixing it up with the young bucks.

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

I repeat you have no experience trying to learn Hung style or Chen style. In Hung style it takes a minimum of six months just to train the legs, without good legs the whole art is garbage. And that's only the start. Those legs have to move and coordinate with the arms. Then you must learn lots of application in both empty hand and weapons work. There are no good Hung stylists who have only a year of training. The best I have seen is a classmate who trained 3 years, five hours a night, seven days a week. This kid was just thirteen years old.

If you can learn those arts in a few months Terrence then you are an absolute genius in martial arts. You would be more impressive than any martial artist that ever existed. Move like Jet Li in 6 months (I know the comeback - he can't fight). To me a Hung style fighter is like a Jet Li but one who can fight and that just can't be achieved quickly.

I have never seen any Tai Chi person who is good in just a couple of years and that only goes for the Tai Chi skills that you consider useless which are form and pushing hands and knowledge and proficiency in the applications. After that you are ready to learn the application in a real fight. It takes some people years to learn how to relax. That's only a start in learning to fight using the internal arts. Some people are naturally more relaxed so they catch on quicker.

Your method - to use a piano analogy this time - is to be happy with playing chop sticks on the piano in your quest to be a concert pianist. This can be learned in about 5 minutes and after that you can impress all kinds of people. After chop sticks go into popular piano to impress even more people.

Piano is an example of an art that takes one a minimum of ten years before you are ready to start work on being a concert pianist. I know one lady who practiced several hours a day for ten years and in the latter years 6 hours or more a day but she couldn't cut it for the real thing. However you probably have a law partner who became a concert pianist in maybe 6 months.

Anything of worth takes time to learn whether it's martial arts, dance, art, Chess, mathematics, English or whatever. Quality and depth of knowledge takes time. Yes - fighting is a part of achieving quality. There is a reason why normal school takes 12 years and most University programs take four (and still that's just a start). But some people have no patience. Those type of people never achieve anything great in my opinion. The exceptions are maybe the prodigies. I'm sure you are one of those since you claim that you can handle most masters. Most in my opinion are probably no better than Chen XiaoWang. Unfortunately my knowledge of Chen style is limited so I can only use him for an example but I think he will do. For chen XiaoWang, I trust the opinion of people more knowledgeable than me who told me he was very good. For me when I see him move, I know that can't be developed in six months.

If martial arts are nothing more than being able to go toe to toe with a kickboxer then yes maybe you can do that in 6 months. To me martial arts have a lot more depth than that. To learn an art completely and to be able to use it for real takes time. In my experience in Hung style, Tai Chi and Wing Chun, I have never seen good results in just a few months. My training and sparring with kickboxers after a few months of these arts, you are doing much more harm than good. You will only train bad habits that once ingrained you can never get rid of.

If you are working on trying to relax then that's difficult to do in a boxing ring when you are a beginner. QiGong, meditation, relaxation, ... all those things take time.

Hung style training starts with building up the body to fight. It isn't doing a nice form. Forms come later. It's like bodybuilding. everyone likes to have a great body in a week but you can't do it. Your body takes time to change. Perhaps they will invent a pill sometime that can do it?

For our Wing Chun, we had no problem to handle all kinds of people from other arts and in street fighting situation. That doesn't apply to all students but to those who liked to fight. However none of that trained good quality Wing Chun. I consider for example what Kenneth Chung does as quality Wing Chun. I also consider what Feng and Chen XiaoWang do as quality Tai Chi and what the founder of Aikido did as quality Aikido. For Tai Kwan Do I consider Huang Jang Lee as being very top notch. My aim is for those kinds of skills and not the kinds of skills that even some of my past students who fought had.

If you want to quickly learn to fight then study bladed weapons fighting. It takes about 8 weeks to get pretty fast with a stick if you train 20 minutes a day. I am sure you could even cut that time down to about a week if not a day.

If someone can turn out a quality Wing Chun fighter in six months then that's great. Tell us how it's done and please give more details then to just jump into a ring with a Thai boxer every day.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
It's not effective staying on the outside (though it provides the means to move from the outside), in a body-to-body clinch, or on the ground. Interesting that you haven't found it to be effective on the ground. That's the only place I still use any WC techs.

[t_niehoff]

If by "on the ground" you mean standing on the ground. ;)

Regards,

Terence

[old jong]

Originally posted by black and blue
OJ

:o... good luck with your classes. You teach WCK as self defense? LOL

:rolleyes:

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun
To learn an art completely and to be able to use it for real takes time To learn any fighting system completely takes a very long time, if not a lifetime. However, to be able to use some of them for real takes only a matter of months.


Originally posted by YongChun
If you are working on trying to relax then that's difficult to do in a boxing ring when you are a beginner. QiGong, meditation, relaxation, ... all those things take time. An experienced boxer will usually be completely relaxed in the ring. Yes, learning to relax takes time, but along the way the boxer has also learned to fight.

[old jong]

Originally posted by black and blue
1)Well, OJ, I hope not stupid, but am interested to hear about your teaching methods and your students drills/work etc outside of form and Chi Sau practice.

2)Trolling? Dunno. Anyone who seems to question 'light' training is seen to be a troll it would seem.



1) I doubt you are really interested to hear about my methods. Beside,I remember something about " feeding our jewels to the pigs" ...I heard somewhere. I regret the use of the word "stupid"...Moron would have been a better choice.

2) Don't make a mistake! (Bush's favorite line!) and try to put others in your unique category!...

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Edmund

1. Why would you want to NOT look like kickboxing when it is so clearly effective for a kickboxing match?

Yes kickboxing is effective. But why then have Tai Chi, Hung style, Ba Gua, Aikido, Wing Chun, Silat etc. if you just want to look like a kickboxer. If you want to be like a kickboxer then study kickboxing. Why waste time in anything else.?

2. All this talk about "WC is for self defence" and the basic stance is vulnerable to a decent kick. If that is called quality, then please call me crappy because that sort of quality hasn't ever worked.

Wing Chun is supposed to be a mobile art. The basic stance provides leg muscle training for those whose legs are weak. After the stationary training comes mobility. A mobile Wing Chun practitioner shouldn’t be vulnerable to a basic kick. A good Wing Chun guy can kick pretty well too. It’s not just a hands only chain punching art.

3. "Quality" guys in HK got their fantastic selves knocked out last month in Muay Thai.

Then they certainly were not quality wing Chun guys. If they won, then they were quality Wing Chun guys. People like Gary Lam have managed to win but he is not the only one who ever did that.

4. Now the story has changed and WC ISN'T easy to apply!
Why the hell is everyone in WC telling their prospective students the complete opposite? :)

A lot of the learn quickly stories were for marketing purposes. On the other hand it took less time to train in Wing Chun and fight than it was to train in many other Kung Fu styles and fight. The other Kung Fu styles have a much larger repertoire to learn. Choy Lee Fut has more than 100 forms. There are 18 weapons to learn. The internal martial artists take years to achieve something. However Terrence says with the right training you can learn Wing Chun very very quickly.

5. I suppose now he's become so much better at WC that he's losing to 5 whitebelts. :) Maybe what you consider crap was actually more effective.

This student achieved something good. In seven months he beat 5 blackbelts. He only used charging in and chain punching and really not much else. However he was no match for my teacher Dr. Khoe, for Roland Wong who was a Hong Kong gang fighter or for Kenneth Chung or Emin Boztepe or for many other Wing Chun masters. He didn’t the time to absorb the art properly and developed a lot of bad habits that were not easy to repair. He was good but he reached an early limit. That’s the problem with approaches that only rely in speed and strength. After a few years improvement is difficult. You can only get so fast and so strong. After that you need to develop other factors which are positioning , sensitivity and timing for a start.

6. :rolleyes:
Kickboxers move the way that they do for reasons. If you are crappy kickers and you never train against them that much, you don't kick pads, you don't really kick each other: Why would you stick to what you do and ignore why kick boxers (who deal with kicks all the time) choose to do what they do?

I am always in favor of looking at what good arts do to try to incorporate what is useful no matter what art it comes from. However I don’t like the Kenpo approach of just adding and adding all kinds of stuff to the art that you really don’t need to make Wing Chun effective. Wing Chun is good. For real fighting against the Thai’s, you have to add the cardio, boxing, Thai boxing type of training or else you can never match those guys. But it your goal is to match those guys I would say it’s a lot better to study Thai boxing. If you want to match the BJJ guys then it’s a lot better to study that stuff firs and then add something from somewhere else. If you want to compete against today’s MMA then you must crosstrain.

7. Plenty have tried your classical WC way and not done well.
How many have to lose? They have to change what they do. It's wrong.

My classical way, which is the same for Hung style and Tai Chi, is to condition your body first. Then learn the classical forms that define the art you are learning. For Wing Chun it is a minimum to learn the SLT, for Tai chi the 108 form and maybe Hung style the Tiger and Crane form. After that learn the applications through drills. After that condition the body more to develop very fast and powerful punches and kicks. After that start sparring against each other. Try to make your art work against resisting opponents. After that spar against styles of all sort, the more the better. After that play with some masters of some arts to realize that there might be more depth to martial arts than you figured. Then repeat and repeat and train and train until you finally fizzle out.

How much time that takes depends on the individual. A lot of black belts take five years to get there. Joe Lewis was a black belt in 6 months. If you can attend seminars by the best masters and fighters you can, get your hands on and listen to what they do and say.

That’s my approach to learning martial art.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
To learn any fighting system completely takes a very long time, if not a lifetime. However, to be able to use some of them for real takes only a matter of months.

An experienced boxer will usually be completely relaxed in the ring. Yes, learning to relax takes time, but along the way the boxer has also learned to fight.

1. It depends against who. To beat Tyson or Chen XiaoWang is not going to just take a few months. Why set your aim low and just think about beating a complete nobody? Aim high? I always think if it's not going to work against Tyson then why train it.

2. Under one of my teachers we covered the whole Wing Chun system in six months, all forms chi sau, sparring etc. After that some people competed against the other arts. So they learned fighting quickly. However this kind of fighting was not anywhere near the qualty of people like Gary Lam, Kenneth Chung, Ho Kam Ming, Augustine Fong, Emin Boztepe, Jessie Glover, Chen Xiaowang, or a fifth degree blackbelt in anything.

[old jong]

Originally posted by Ernie
Jong ,

why do things have to have labels ?
O.J.- Would you buy a can without a label?...

if a pak sau is practiced one a focus mitt then it is no longer a wing chun pak sau but a jkd pak sau

O.J.- You hit the mit but where do you pak?...I practice my punches on the bag .

if your training bridging and closing with impact and you use a mitt for proctection and the ability to do it over and over at power with out injury to the hitter or feeder

O.J.- I used to practice real impact with fellow students wearing two TKD chest protectors and still my punches where too hard. I doubt a mit placed on the centerline will suffice.

then this is jkd ?

O.J.- This is the stuff I remember from B.L.

then by that logic wing chun needs some jkd

O.J.- Not my logic. To each his own.


labels are silly they seperate us and prevent us from growing

O.J.- But they are practical if you want to know what is in the can!...;) (Anyway,you know I like to tease you with the JKD line!...;) )

a pak is a pak , as long as your cultivating the body engine and relaxed power release

O.J.- A pak is just a basic move found in many different styles such as JKD and ...Wing Chun. ;)

the tool you hit should not matter

O.J.- As long as it develop Wing Chun power. (it is still a Wing Chun forum?)

i don't follow your logic , and i'm not trying to argue or be disrespectful

O.J.- But you're so good at it!... :p (seriously) I would not have answered if you were acting like B&B or something!...Just remember that my initial post on this subject was not so "negative" I just think that it is not an "essential" thing to do.That's all!... (IMHO tabarnak!)

instead trying to erase some of the [jump to conclusion knee jerk reactions ] that seem to dominate these days

O.J.- What does that "knee jerk" thing means?...

[planetwc]

Originally posted by t_niehoff


**I could kick CXW's @ss; so would Ernie, Andrew, and anyone else that fights as part of their training. CXW has no fighting skill. And I'm not bragging because I'm not very good (lots of folks can beat me) -- but I fight as part of my training and he doesn't. A MMAist with 2 years training that fights regularly would destroy CXW too, because CXW doesn't get into the pool so he can't be a good swimmer. All his forms and drills (push hands) mean nothing if he isn't fighting. But you're right -- nonfighters see him in demo and are impressed, and they follow what he says thinking that if they do, they'll become as "good" too. The rub is that he is good in demo but not in fighting, and by doing what he does will never make them skilled fighters (and, of course, that's why we don't see any tai ji fighters).
Regards,

Terence

If you've never fought CXW how would you know what fighting skill he does or does not have?

Overstating your case of ANYONE with 2 years MMA training "destroying" someone is 1000% pure unadulterated hyperbole.

One can remember all the chest pounding about how BJJ guys with just 2 years of training as a blue belt would DESTROY any Judo fighter etc. etc.

Time has shown that logic to be a bit overstated I think.

CXW was in Los Angeles back in August and will be in New York in a few days. Perhaps next year when he circles around to LA, you can drop in, challenge him, rush in on him if he refuses and give him that logically proven pounding you can dish out.

Training realistically against a resisting opponent absolutely is an excellent training methodology. However, making extrapolations without evidence is just another exercise in dry land "thinking".

Watching Klitschko in Vegas against that poor boxer was a great example of this. Klitschko (sp) was doing a horrible job against a guy whose plan was to avoid him for 5 rounds, get him gassed and then pound him out. The fight was stopped due to deep cut on Klitschko. He "won" on points, yet gave a dismal performance and was even hammered once by his "logically" outclassed opponent.

Yet Klitschko is supposed to be the next heavyweight champion?
:rolleyes:

The point being Klitschko has fought some of the best in the past in the ring and is supposed to be a top tieir fighter; yet he could not take apart a boxer with less experience (in gasp the ring) or deal with his opponent's lesser skills. Logic didn't carry the day. Luck gave him the win that day, via a headbutt cut, but showed him to be unimpressive and not ready to be the champion.

So until you have personally done an "oil check" on CXW, I'd think it more prudent to ease up on the hype.

[reneritchie]

Sigh...

Rickson by waterbottle....

[sihing]

Originally posted by t_neighoff
I could kick CXW's @ss; so would Ernie, Andrew, and anyone else that fights as part of their training. CXW has no fighting skill. And I'm not bragging because I'm not very good (lots of folks can beat me) -- but I fight as part of my training and he doesn't. A MMAist with 2 years training that fights regularly would destroy CXW too, because CXW doesn't get into the pool so he can't be a good swimmer. All his forms and drills (push hands) mean nothing if he isn't fighting.

If your no good Terence(by your own admission) and you fight all the time then your theory sucks, and is null and void...

James

[Vajramusti]

David W sez:


CXW was in Los Angeles back in August and will be in New York in a few days.

((He was here last week. I have some friends in the taiji community))

Perhaps next year when he circles around to LA, you can drop in, challenge him, rush in on him if he refuses and give him that logically proven pounding you can dish out.

((Oh NO!. Please dont encourage this nonsense))

Training realistically against a resisting opponent absolutely is an excellent training methodology.

((I used to punch water buffaloes in India as kid- does that count. Only got them mad))

However, making extrapolations without evidence is just another exercise in dry land "thinking".

((Wet lands are in serious trouble--- oops wrong forum))

Watching Klitschko in Vegas against that poor boxer was a great example of this. Klitschko (sp) was doing a horrible job against a guy whose plan was to avoid him for 5 rounds, get him gassed and then pound him out. The fight was stopped due to deep cut on Klitschko. He "won" on points, yet gave a dismal performance and was even hammered once by his "logically" outclassed opponent.

Yet Klitschko is supposed to be the next heavyweight champion?

((Klitschko has great push/punch power. I missed the fight- was not interested. Emmanuel Seward has been involved in trying to refocus the training of both brothers. It is not showing yet.Getting rid of old habits aint easy. Seward and others(me too) have a good explanation for the vacuum among the heavyweights-MONEY. Many big guys are going into pro football-
the stars are making big bucks and fewr headaches for the most part. Football is not an easy healthy sport-but pro boxing is a different world. The real talent is in the welter, middle and light heavyweight divisions- weight does make a differemce))









Rene sez:

Rickson by waterbottle....

(Possibly not. The size, height and reach differences are considerable. K could adjust- he actually has been a kick boxing champion in Europe. NTW both bros have PhDs in Physical Education!!))


__________________

[old jong]

Originally posted by black and blue... :rolleyes:


I never hope for anyone to be mugged... but with these guys, I pray it never happens.

"You wanna take my wallet, eh? Yeah, just try and take it whilst avoiding my arms as I go through the SNT set!!!!"

:p

That's a classic!...Really,I understand why guys telling things like that leave Wing Chun...And it's a good thing for Wing Chun. I hope you'll get some better understanding of your Hsing Yi....Sincerely :)

[YongChun]

I think we have reached the limit of intelligent discussion on this kind of topic.

Someone who has not fought any good classical martial artists or has never formally trained any classical martial art in depth can never be convinced of the value therein. The value of any art is not quick results. Someone who has learned piano the real way, by trial and error and has mastered "Twinkle Twinkle Litte Star" cannot easily appreciate what went into Beethoven or Mozart's music. Unless you have been fortunate to have studied under a top master you cannot relate to what it's all about. All you can say is :Oh Ya, my brother Harry can take him with one arm tied behind his back.

Throughout history there has always been the equivalent of kickboxing and there has always been martial art. Martial art doesn't seem to be going away because of the kickboxers. Martial art is a discipline that takes years of dedication if you want to be top notch.

Six months of training will produce nothing of worth in regards to real fighting but could provide an excellent mental and physical foundation if you are put on the right path. It's only a good start. A lot of the discussion is no more than the man on the street who says: Oh ya, let's see if it works against Hulk Hogen.

What's better, being one of a million brawlers that are out their or dedicating one's life to martial art to produce what the founder of Aikido did, what Yip Man did, what Funakoshi did, what Jet Li did etc. or being another local Mr. tough in my neighborhood kickboxer? Those greats have inspired millions to achieve something. Your local kickboxing champion will inspire who and to what?

Kickboxing is fine for what it is and so are the people doing it. But it's not in the same kind of league. It's not better or worse, it's just an apples vs oranges type of argument.

Those who have been around know that there are some pretty good classical martial artists out there. Those who haven't survived the encounter know this best.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ernie
Jong ,

why do things have to have labels ?
O.J.- Would you buy a can without a label?...


labels are silly they seperate us and prevent us from growing

O.J.- But they are practical if you want to know what is in the can!... (Anyway,you know I like to tease you with the JKD line!... )


I think we shouldn't have labels like Aikido, Tai Chi, Hung Gar, Preying Mantis, Wing Chun, Boxing, Thai Boxing, Fencing, etc. They should outlaw labels. Everything should be just called fighting. Join Joe's fighting school. The curriculum could all be standardized to hitting the bags and then sparring against boxers. No need for all those other forms, Chi sau, pushing hands, or all the other things that don't work in the ring. The new McDonald's of fighting approach will save everyone a lot of time because there won't be a need to discuss anything. The only thing that will count is wins in the ring like notches on your gun.

Thinking of Clint Eastwood, who cares who he learned from and what he knows? The main thing is he could shoot faster than the bad guys and that's all that counts. You only get there by having gun fights and not by dry land swimming or shooting cans off fences.

I propose all cans of food just be labelled as food. What's it matter what's inside the can. If it will stop your hunger feeling then that's all you need.

Music should just be called music. Why divide people into classical, Jazz, blues, rock, fusion, hip-hop, folk? Music is music. You got it or you ain't. Music and noise, it's all the same.

Most school subjects should also be disbanded in favor of one subject called life skills. If something is not contributing directly to surviving in this world then it's not needed and should be scrapped. Life skills will have anything anyone every needs, reading writing and arithmetic, it's all there. In six months you could learn it all and the rest of the time is better spent working and training to fight.

Vote for my party to change the world.

[Ernie]

Ray
are you feeling cranky today :)

i don't like labels , there are training methods that produce results , those training methods might come from many places .
if you recognize what your goal is then you can have an open mind and research training methods .

this way i can look at another wing chun persons idea's and see what part there drill is developing and this might be something i like

or maybe i'll see it in a boxing gym and modify the method for my desired goal

that's the problem with labels people like to fit things into little boxes and put those boxes in a nice little stack

but just like a fight is organic and alive , the training methods should be as well

there would be no wing chun if people didn't look around and say [ hey we can make it better ] they drew from what was offered in other methods tested and refined
why should we be so lazy as to not at least research and try the same

can't worse thing is you find out the traditional method had merit

but i know there will always be those that got the OCD thing and hav to line it all up to make them feel like all is perfect in the universe :p

[old jong]

Hey Ernie!
How about the label: Hetero?...Or you prefer the label :Open for anything!...
I don't know you personaly but I think you prefer to be "labeled" as the first one!...;)

[t_niehoff]

planetwc wrote:

If you've never fought CXW how would you know what fighting skill he does or does not have?

**Sorry to have stepped on one of your idols -- but it's a rather simple matter: if someone doesn't fight as part of their training, and I don't care what their name is or how long they've been training to fight without fighting, they cannot have developed much in the way of fighting skill. They can only become better fighters by fighting. And once they stop fighting, their skill decreases.

Overstating your case of ANYONE with 2 years MMA training "destroying" someone is 1000% pure unadulterated hyperbole.

**It's as simple as saying that someone with two years of being in the pool swimming will be a better swimmer than someone that has spent a lifetime on the side of the pool. It has nothing to do with style and everything to do with training.

One can remember all the chest pounding about how BJJ guys with just 2 years of training as a blue belt would DESTROY any Judo fighter etc. etc.

**I don't know what you are talking about. All I'm saying is one doesn't significantly increase their fighting ability by not fighting. CXW can do all the forms, all the push-hands, etc. but if he doesn't fight, he'll forever suck. He may look great at demos, and he may appear great when "touching hands", but that's not fighting.

Time has shown that logic to be a bit overstated I think.

**History has repeatedly demonstrated and proven the training principle of needing to actually fight to become a better fighter. No one has ever proven otherwise. Folks like to think they can, however. And there is always someone standing by willing to offer them that opportunity for money.

CXW was in Los Angeles back in August and will be in New York in a few days. Perhaps next year when he circles around to LA, you can drop in, challenge him, rush in on him if he refuses and give him that logically proven pounding you can dish out.

**CXW will never fight anyone if he can help it. He can't afford to. He has little fighting skill because he doesn't train to fight, and if all his devoted followers ever saw him get knocked around, he wouldn't be making much money off of TJQ. Tell me, David, who has CXW ever fought? This is reputedly the "best" guy in TJQ -- who has he ever fought? A "world-class martial artist" who has never fought -- do you see the contradiction?

Training realistically against a resisting opponent absolutely is an excellent training methodology. However, making extrapolations without evidence is just another exercise in dry land "thinking".

**It's not just an "excellent training methodology", fighting as part of one's training is the only way -- only way -- to become a significantly better fighter. History has proven it. And it's just common sense. Once we accept that, then we also will accept that anyone who hasn't done that training, can't possibly have significantly increased their fighting skills. The only people who believe CXW can fight are those persons who want to believe it's possible to become a better fighter without fighting (perhaps CXW is the poster-child for that POV).

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ernie
Ray
are you feeling cranky today :) :p

No Ernie, just talking. Sometimes joking. Don't take anything I say as too serious and I know you don't. I guess we need at least one thread like this and then I hope the other threads also continue and don't all turn into this kind. This forum is for discussion and sometimes it goes in all directions but eventually settles down to something useful. All points of view are good in my mind. I don't think it's good if we all had the same kind of Wing Chun or training methods. With diversity, no one can ever say Wing Chun is no good. He would have to try against good people from all the various lineages first. Nature says that diversity is important for survival. So our differing points of view are good. Now lets see who can produce a champion?

[Tydive]

Terence,

I can agree with you to a point, but after that you are way to dogmatic. Nothing is quite as effective as full contact to see what works... however practicing the forms gives you the tools to use in a fight. Discounting the value of forms and spar is just as silly as saying that full contact does not have value.

Fighting does not mean that you will get any better. You still need to do the work and learn so that you do more than just flail. I have never been in a street fight that lasted more than 10 seconds... I can't say I learned much from any of them. Practice is where you learn, street (or ring) is where you apply what you learned.

Now, how about talking about the ART of Martial Arts? The science of Boxing?

[old jong]

No Ray! tell the truth!...You're a grumpy old man,just like me, Joy and some others. You love to argue with these young "know it all" who really know nothing and even more with these old badass who want us to believe that they are still ( or were?) top dogs!...GRRRRR!...;)

[YongChun]

planetwc wrote:
Terrence says:
1. And once they stop fighting, their skill decreases.

Too bad Gary Lam, Emin Boztepe and most of the other masters in martial art have stopped fighting. Now they are all washed up and can’t fight anymore. What a shame.

Terrence says:
2. Tell me, David, who has CXW ever fought? This is reputedly the "best" guy in TJQ -- who has he ever fought? A "world-class martial artist" who has never fought -- do you see the contradiction?

Who has Yip Man every fought? Who has the founder of Aikido ever fought that we have heard of? Who had Funakoshi fought? I read that Nadi was the world’s best fencer however who has he ever fought that I heard of? Who has Bruce Lee fought? No one has fought the tough guys around here. Why is everyone learning from these washed up people who have never fought anyone that we recognize? Millions of people must be really stupid to do this? Hey – there doesn’t seem to be one Wing Chun fighting champion around who has every fought anyone that counts. That really sucks.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by old jong
No Ray! tell the truth!...You're a grumpy old man,just like me, Joy and some others. You love to argue with these young "know it all" who really know nothing and even more with these old badass who want us to believe that they are still ( or were?) top dogs!...GRRRRR!...;)

What, you didn't fall for that? Well someone has to argue with these 15 year olds otherwise all the arts will go extinct.

I can beat anyone in a Tan sau competition too and not the sissy close range patty cake kind from Chi sau. The distance full contact kind with full protection.

Ray

[old jong]

Or drowned?...;)

[sihing]

Ray,
Don't expect a answer anytime soon from Terence. I asked that same thing a while ago and still haven't heard the answer, but it is a good question. And why even be interested in the answer? He's already admitted he's not very good and he fights all the time, so who cares.

James

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
CXW can do all the forms, all the push-hands, etc. but if he doesn't fight, he'll forever suck.

This may be your opinion and theory, but it is not a validated fact. Unless by your definition anyone who doesn't fight sucks in the more general sense of that term. Or perhaps you'd like to redefine "suck" in some other way.

FWIW, a new tact is direly needed; this swimming analogy thing has truly become a dead-end argument. Additionally, continuing to address people in a condescending manner (e.g., "**Sorry to have stepped on one of your idols", etc. etc.) betrays a level of emotion at odds with objective and substantive analysis.

Regards,
- kj

[YongChun]

I think we should all stop wasting time on this thread and get back to discussing much more interesting things and details of the art and actual experiences we have had. What one person thinks doesn't really matter. The reality guys should get back to this disussion when they have produced someone who has fought and consistently won against someone that we all agree is good. This is only fair since it is the requirement that some put onto Chen Xiaowang to prove he is really good. To him most if not all of us would be a joke.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by YongChun
I think we should all stop wasting time on this thread and get back to discussing much more interesting things and details of the art and actual experiences we have had. What one person thinks doesn't really matter. The reality guys should get back to this disussion when they have produced someone who has fought and consistently won against someone that we all agree is good. This is only fair since it is the requirement that some put onto Chen Xiaowang to prove he is really good. To him most if not all of us would be a joke.

*Applause




A fighters just someone who get's back up!

[YongChun]

This topic does receive a lot of attention. There is kind of a similar topic being discussed on the Tai Chi forum (shouldn't crash their party though if you never did Tai Chi) where the topic is "Judo vs Tai Chi". As of 4:06 my time that topic had 135 posts and this one had 134 posts. Chen XiaoWang is also mentioned there. The Tai Chi one started because a Judo guy felt that none of the Tai Chi masters anywhere could handle the top guys in Judo. No conclusions have been reached there either.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by YongChun
Originally posted by Edmund

1. Why would you want to NOT look like kickboxing when it is so clearly effective for a kickboxing match?

Yes kickboxing is effective. But why then have Tai Chi, Hung style, Ba Gua, Aikido, Wing Chun, Silat etc. if you just want to look like a kickboxer. If you want to be like a kickboxer then study kickboxing. Why waste time in anything else.?



Exactly.
You want to be effective in standup striking, you should study kickboxing.

Other arts are not as good at it overall and unless they realize that and grow and adapt they are going to be truly screwed for a long time in terms of real skill. All those guys would get beaten in kickboxing. They haven't got the skills to compete.

These are the very basic skills, like throwing a straight punch or a kick. But if you can't even apply them in the ring and use skill to beat someone, how can you talk about high level art?

How can you be a "master" if you don't understand the simplest fighting skills that you see in kickboxing all the time?




2. All this talk about "WC is for self defence" and the basic stance is vulnerable to a decent kick. If that is called quality, then please call me crappy because that sort of quality hasn't ever worked.

Wing Chun is supposed to be a mobile art. The basic stance provides leg muscle training for those whose legs are weak. After the stationary training comes mobility. A mobile Wing Chun practitioner shouldn’t be vulnerable to a basic kick. A good Wing Chun guy can kick pretty well too. It’s not just a hands only chain punching art.



They have been kicked previously in kickboxing matches.
Why? Because they got no clue about kicking. Certainly no where near the level of kickboxing.

Trying to look like Wing Chun is where they fell flat on their faces.
Anyone can say they're mobile. But are they "win a kickboxing match" mobile or not?

Until you're at a kickboxing level, you can't say you're good.



3. "Quality" guys in HK got their fantastic selves knocked out last month in Muay Thai.

Then they certainly were not quality wing Chun guys. If they won, then they were quality Wing Chun guys. People like Gary Lam have managed to win but he is not the only one who ever did that.


So you're only quality if you win.
Before you were saying that you won with crap WC.

I can afford to be a little smug because my guys have won too.
But we still have a lot to learn. I'm not saying we're something fantastic. It's only at a local level here in Australia. We learn Muay Thai from a few pretty good guys because they know about Muay Thai. They understand what's involved in a match. Skill is involved. Real skill that actually beats people.

How can you win or improve if you don't even have the willingness to learn off the pros?

My WC sifu is late 50s and he's still willing to go to Thailand and learn Muay Thai because he can see that they have new skills to offer and he's confident in his own skill area.

WC hand skills are very good and understanding how to borrow the force and redirect it. But if you are sh!thouse in other departments, then learn.




I am always in favor of looking at what good arts do to try to incorporate what is useful no matter what art it comes from. However I don’t like the Kenpo approach of just adding and adding all kinds of stuff to the art that you really don’t need to make Wing Chun effective. Wing Chun is good. For real fighting against the Thai’s, you have to add the cardio, boxing, Thai boxing type of training or else you can never match those guys. But it your goal is to match those guys I would say it’s a lot better to study Thai boxing. If you want to match the BJJ guys then it’s a lot better to study that stuff firs and then add something from somewhere else. If you want to compete against today’s MMA then you must crosstrain.


How can you say Wing Chun is good if you can't match these guys at all? How can you say you don't need to add things if you can't match these guys in skill?

All those fancy arts (bagua, taiji, aikido, Hung gar etc) are full of crap techniques. They also have some good techniques and ideas. It's a matter of being able to sift through and understand what is truly going to work in a fight.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
This topic does receive a lot of attention. There is kind of a similar topic being discussed on the Tai Chi forum (shouldn't crash their party though if you never did Tai Chi) where the topic is "Judo vs Tai Chi". As of 4:06 my time that topic had 135 posts and this one had 134 posts. Chen XiaoWang is also mentioned there. The Tai Chi one started because a Judo guy felt that none of the Tai Chi masters anywhere could handle the top guys in Judo. No conclusions have been reached there either.

A conclusion will never be reached. I have beaten CMA, so have several others on the forums. On the same hand, several CMA have beaten other TMA and some sport fighters. Right now, we are merely theorizing, basically. And since my experiences are different from yours, we will never agree. The only way to settle it would be for the participants of the thread to get together and have a competition. And even then, it's not completely settled, as this will merely be one fight on one day.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun

If martial arts are nothing more than being able to go toe to toe with a kickboxer then yes maybe you can do that in 6 months.

IMO, there is a problem there. a style SHOULD have you proficient in a short amount of time. you won't master it in that time frame, but you should at least have some level of practical applicable proficiency.

To me martial arts have a lot more depth than that. To learn an art completely and to be able to use it for real takes time.

like I said, you won't master it in this time, but you should at least be able to use what you've learned up to that point.

In my experience in Hung style, Tai Chi and Wing Chun, I have never seen good results in just a few months. My training and sparring with kickboxers after a few months of these arts, you are doing much more harm than good. You will only train bad habits that once ingrained you can never get rid of.

the sparring doesn't have to be with kickboxers. spar within your style. That's how it starts. branch out later. the point is that some contact training against a resisting opponent is necessary.

If you are working on trying to relax then that's difficult to do in a boxing ring when you are a beginner.

it's easier than you'd think. That's the beauty af getting in there and doing it.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
Originally posted by Edmund
Then they certainly were not quality wing Chun guys. If they won, then they were quality Wing Chun guys. People like Gary Lam have managed to win but he is not the only one who ever did that.

That's the single, biggest load of BS I've ever heard. They weren' quality because they lost? wake up...



This student achieved something good. In seven months he beat 5 blackbelts. He only used charging in and chain punching and really not much else.

I saw a WC teacher use that same strategy against a karate brown belt in a continuous fighting tourney a few years ago and he got his arse kicked.

I am always in favor of looking at what good arts do to try to incorporate what is useful no matter what art it comes from. However I don’t like the Kenpo approach of just adding and adding all kinds of stuff to the art that you really don’t need to make Wing Chun effective. Wing Chun is good. For real fighting against the Thai’s, you have to add the cardio, boxing, Thai boxing type of training or else you can never match those guys. But it your goal is to match those guys I would say it’s a lot better to study Thai boxing. If you want to match the BJJ guys then it’s a lot better to study that stuff firs and then add something from somewhere else. If you want to compete against today’s MMA then you must crosstrain.

using that logic, WC isn't good for anything other than fighting wc guys...

My classical way, which is the same for Hung style and Tai Chi, is to condition your body first.

IMO, that's flawed. Why not learn techniques and condition simultaneously?

Then learn the classical forms that define the art you are learning. For Wing Chun it is a minimum to learn the SLT, for Tai chi the 108 form and maybe Hung style the Tiger and Crane form. After that learn the applications through drills.

instead, do not worry about the form so soon. since you would be learning the techniques while you were conditioning, then you would be working various techniques from the form, drilling them and receiving corrections on them. You would then do more advanced drilling where your partner attacks as his own pace and you respond with specific techniques.

After that condition the body more to develop very fast and powerful punches and kicks.

the conditioning should never stop.

After that start sparring against each other. Try to make your art work against resisting opponents.

that would begine about 3-4 months into training.


After that spar against styles of all sort, the more the better.

step in the ring - local and small time competitions. this would happen after approx. 1 year.


After that play with some masters of some arts to realize that there might be more depth to martial arts than you figured. Then repeat and repeat and train and train until you finally fizzle out.

enter bigger competitions - regional, national, international, etc. turn pro of you desire.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
1. It depends against who. To beat Tyson or Chen XiaoWang is not going to just take a few months. Why set your aim low and just think about beating a complete nobody? Aim high? I always think if it's not going to work against Tyson then why train it.

there's your problem. you are concerned with how long it will take you to beat a master. Guess what? If you train 30 years but never fight, you will never be able to beat that master. the student of a few months that we are talking about would get KTFO by tyson, but he is on his way, building experience by getting fights. Your way, you aren't even getting that much. So, from a fighting standpoint, after 6 months, my guy is better off than yours.

[YongChun]

1. How can you be a "master" if you don't understand the simplest fighting skills that you see in kickboxing all the time?

I agree. True master in any Kung Fu art understand that. If they don’t then they are not true masters.

2. They have been kicked previously in kickboxing matches.
Why? Because they got no clue about kicking. Certainly no where near the level of kickboxing.

I agree. A true Wing Chun master should be better than a kickboxer. I think Gary Lam is better than a lot of kickboxers. All top Kung Fu fighting masters were better than kickboxers.

3. Trying to look like Wing Chun is where they fell flat on their faces. Anyone can say they're mobile. But are they "win a kickboxing match" mobile or not?

Wing Chun who are good, don’t all fall on their faces. Gary Lam is an example of someone who doesn’t.

4. Until you're at a kickboxing level, you can't say you're good.

I agree. A wing Chun master should be better otherwise he is not a master. There are many who are better.

5. So you're only quality if you win.
Before you were saying that you won with crap WC.

No you can be quality also if you don’t win. It depends on how you win. If you win because the guy slipped on a banana peel them maybe you are not good. If you constantly lose though then probably your skill is not good enough and then I would say you have low Wing Chun quality.

6. I can afford to be a little smug because my guys have won too.
But we still have a lot to learn. I'm not saying we're something fantastic. It's only at a local level here in Australia. We learn Muay Thai from a few pretty good guys because they know about Muay Thai. They understand what's involved in a match. Skill is involved. Real skill that actually beats people.

I agree. Real skill in any art beats people. It’s good what you are doing. I am always for learning off good fighters whatever their art or style.

7. How can you win or improve if you don't even have the willingness to learn off the pros?

I agree. I always advocated learning from better people and the pros. That’s what we have always tried to do.

8. My WC sifu is late 50s and he's still willing to go to Thailand and learn Muay Thai because he can see that they have new skills to offer and he's confident in his own skill area.

I agree that’s very good.

9. WC hand skills are very good and understanding how to borrow the force and redirect it. But if you are sh!thouse in other departments, then learn.

I agree. I always advocate this. That’s why we learned from many kinds of experts.

10. How can you say Wing Chun is good if you can't match these guys at all? How can you say you don't need to add things if you can't match these guys in skill?

A Wing Chun practitioner is good or no good. I believe Gary Lam is good because I saw his videos and trust that Ernie knows what he is talking about. You don’t need to add things because Wing Chun is good enough. The WT people didn’t need to add anything to Wing Chun. They just improved the training method.

11. All those fancy arts (bagua, taiji, aikido, Hung gar etc) are full of crap techniques. They also have some good techniques and ideas. It's a matter of being able to sift through and understand what is truly going to work in a fight.

Arts only look fancy when you don’t know the application. The fighters in ALL those arts are never fancy. In my Hung style there were no fancy movements. It was the art the underground used to kill each other. It can’t be fancy. Good Tai Chi and Ba Gua also is not fancy. People who don’t know what they are doing and who don’t have actual fighting skill are fancy. Movie fighting is fancy. To the man in the bar Wing Chun also looks very fancy because it doesn’t look like brawling.

[YongChun]

SeveStar:
there's your problem. you are concerned with how long it will take you to beat a master. Guess what? If you train 30 years but never fight, you will never be able to beat that master.

- guess what every idiot knows that. You have no idea what my points are. We are only talking about time frames not about whether one should fight or not. You are arguing with the wrong person about this. I never advocated not fighting. -Ray

the student of a few months that we are talking about would get KTFO by tyson, but he is on his way, building experience by getting fights. Your way, you aren't even getting that much. So, from a fighting standpoint, after 6 months, my guy is better off than yours.

- guess what, that's very obvious. Guess what, you don't know anything about my way or about the results of my students or about the backgrounds of my students. I must say your statements are totally stupid and very presumptuous, A number of our students are well cross trained. One was the wrestling champion of the province. another trained Sanda for ten years and was the Sanda champion in Ontario. One is an Olympic calibre Judo competitor. One trans Thai boxing, submission wrestling. Another is a boxer by background. One trained Kyokoshin Karate for a long time, and worked as an enforcer for a big asia drug gang. Several students are police officers who have used Wing Chun on numerous occasions. One guy is a jail guard who worked as a bouncer for many years. He uses only the Wing Chun we train. So I think we can hold our own. Your knowledge of our Wing Chun is based on what? On nothing. Even so, we are far from the best. I have met many good fighters of all sorts since the 1960's in all arts. I'm no fool and wouldn't tell anyone their club members can't fight.

[Edmund]

The problem is that WC people don't believe that kickboxing has any skills worth learning. Even when they are being beat with skill. There's obvious value therein.

Just talking about WC, there's value therein also.
But you have to be honest and see the crap is therein too.

Stances are valuable for beginners to get leg strength etc. And later we become mobile. And then we have to train to be mobile vs kicks. Just as you said.

Doing chi sao, you're too close to the partner to learn that sort of footwork or that sort of kicking. The forms of WC don't have the depth of kicking skill that is going to be competitive in kickboxing hence most WC people don't get exposed to good kicking.

How are you going to learn to kick better?
Just going in the ring against kicking styles isn't enough.
Same goes for knees in the clinch.

This has been proven time and time again. WC people have competed in kickboxing and really they have to improve what they do. You always have to modify how you train and search for new ideas.

Actually the guys in HK realize this, far more than you guys. Whether they can fix what they do enough to win is another story.

Because WC tends to train with their feet flat on the ground, there's a tendency to be an instant slower. In the ring, that gets exposed. Similarly standing too square at a distance gives a big target for the opponent to kick.



Originally posted by YongChun

Someone who has not fought any good classical martial artists or has never formally trained any classical martial art in depth can never be convinced of the value therein. The value of any art is not quick results. Someone who has learned piano the real way, by trial and error and has mastered "Twinkle Twinkle Litte Star" cannot easily appreciate what went into Beethoven or Mozart's music. Unless you have been fortunate to have studied under a top master you cannot relate to what it's all about. All you can say is :Oh Ya, my brother Harry can take him with one arm tied behind his back.

..
..

Kickboxing is fine for what it is and so are the people doing it. But it's not in the same kind of league. It's not better or worse, it's just an apples vs oranges type of argument.

[anerlich]

WC people have competed in kickboxing and really they have to improve what they do.

My sifu and some of my shings and sidais have done well in kickboxing. We even had a young guy who did quite well in a recent Shooto tournament because his striking was so much better than that of he most of his felllow competitors, though he won one match by grappling submission as well.

The key is being able to adapt what you do to the arena. rather than assume the arena is not worth entering becuase what you do is too deadly and can't be adapted so your fellow competitors will all die, or that your inability to perform successfully is the arena's fault, rather than of your inability to adapt to it.

If you do not respect the arena and its denizens, you will probably not be able to adapt.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun

Someone who has not fought any good classical martial artists or has never formally trained any classical martial art in depth can never be convinced of the value therein. The value of any art is not quick results. Someone who has learned piano the real way, by trial and error and has mastered "Twinkle Twinkle Litte Star" cannot easily appreciate what went into Beethoven or Mozart's music. Unless you have been fortunate to have studied under a top master you cannot relate to what it's all about. All you can say is :Oh Ya, my brother Harry can take him with one arm tied behind his back.

ironically, this reminds me of all the TMA that would say "to stop a double leg, all you have to do is root yourself, and he won't be able to move you", or "all you have to do is sidestep", even though they had no prior experience with grapplers...

Throughout history there has always been the equivalent of kickboxing and there has always been martial art. Martial art doesn't seem to be going away because of the kickboxers. Martial art is a discipline that takes years of dedication if you want to be top notch.

anything takes years of discipline to be top notch. However, it doesn't take years and years to be proficient, or at least it shouldn't. thai boxing, wrestling, kickboxing, etc. are all martial arts as well as combat sports. And no, they haven't gone away. As long as there are people with varied tastes, they will never go away. They aren't still around because of combat effectiveness.

Six months of training will produce nothing of worth in regards to real fighting but could provide an excellent mental and physical foundation if you are put on the right path. It's only a good start. A lot of the discussion is no more than the man on the street who says: Oh ya, let's see if it works against Hulk Hogen.

a good start is all it is supposed to be.

What's better, being one of a million brawlers that are out their or dedicating one's life to martial art to produce what the founder of Aikido did, what Yip Man did, what Funakoshi did, what Jet Li did etc. or being another local Mr. tough in my neighborhood kickboxer? Those greats have inspired millions to achieve something. Your local kickboxing champion will inspire who and to what?

jigoro kano has inspired millions, as have the fighters in pride, ufc, etc. benny the jet has inspired many. billy blanks has inspired many. Don wilson - a kung fu stylist who managed to become successful in the ring - has inspired many. Do you have a point with your statement?

Kickboxing is fine for what it is and so are the people doing it. But it's not in the same kind of league.

how is it not? peng, hua, zang.... start naming principles. sport fighting has most of them.

Those who have been around know that there are some pretty good classical martial artists out there. Those who haven't survived the encounter know this best.

how cliche is that?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun

I agree. A true Wing Chun master should be better than a kickboxer. I think Gary Lam is better than a lot of kickboxers. All top Kung Fu fighting masters were better than kickboxers.

and

I agree. A wing Chun master should be better otherwise he is not a master. There are many who are better.

:rolleyes: you're full of it... way too elitist. When you become a master, PLEASE challenge me.

Arts only look fancy when you don’t know the application. The fighters in ALL those arts are never fancy. In my Hung style there were no fancy movements. It was the art the underground used to kill each other. It can’t be fancy. Good Tai Chi and Ba Gua also is not fancy. People who don’t know what they are doing and who don’t have actual fighting skill are fancy. Movie fighting is fancy. To the man in the bar Wing Chun also looks very fancy because it doesn’t look like brawling.

not necessarily. Arts do have fluff techniques, regardless of whether or not they have an application. I know applications for the butterfly kick, but how practical is it? That probably applies to most styles. thai boxing has a jumping elbow, knee and punch. the punch and knee are useful, IMO, but I wouldn't use the elbow.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by anerlich
My sifu and some of my shings and sidais have done well in kickboxing. We even had a young guy who did quite well in a recent Shooto tournament because his striking was so much better than that of he most of his felllow competitors, though he won one match by grappling submission as well.

The key is being able to adapt what you do to the arena. rather than assume the arena is not worth entering becuase what you do is too deadly and can't be adapted so your fellow competitors will all die, or that your inability to perform successfully is the arena's fault, rather than of your inability to adapt to it.

If you do not respect the arena and its denizens, you will probably not be able to adapt.


best

post

ever

[YongChun]

SevenStar:
I agree. A true Wing Chun master should be better than a kickboxer. I think Gary Lam is better than a lot of kickboxers. All top Kung Fu fighting masters were better than kickboxers.

and

I agree. A wing Chun master should be better otherwise he is not a master. There are many who are better.

you're full of it... way too elitist. When you become a master, PLEASE challenge me.

Ray's response:
I didn't say any Wing Chun master exists. By Terrences definition none exist and I am fine with that.

How am I elitist? I have met many good martial artists in all kinds of arts. I am not one to say that just Wing Chun is good. I have never said that anywhere that I know of.

Ok then the opposite of what I said must be true. So let's try that again:

1. A true Wing Chun master will always be worse than a kickboxer.
2. Gary Lam is worse than most kickboxers.
3. A Wing Chun master should be worse than a kickboxer to be a master.

If that makes more sense then fine with me.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun

- guess what every idiot knows that. You have no idea what my points are. We are only talking about time frames not about whether one should fight or not. You are arguing with the wrong person about this. I never advocated not fighting. -Ray

from the sounds of it, there may be one who doesn't know... regardless, I've already posted my feelings on your timeframe.

- guess what, that's very obvious. Guess what, you don't know anything about my way or about the results of my students or about the backgrounds of my students. I must say your statements are totally stupid and very presumptuous, A number of our students are well cross trained.

MY statements are stupid and presumptuous? Mr. WC masters should be better than all kickboxers? Mr. the WC guys that lost weren't quality??!?! Look in the mirror bud.


One was the wrestling champion of the province. another trained Sanda for ten years and was the Sanda champion in Ontario. One is an Olympic calibre Judo competitor. One trans Thai boxing, submission wrestling. Another is a boxer by background. One trained Kyokoshin Karate for a long time, and worked as an enforcer for a big asia drug gang. Several students are police officers who have used Wing Chun on numerous occasions. One guy is a jail guard who worked as a bouncer for many years. He uses only the Wing Chun we train. So I think we can hold our own.

wow... my judo coach was 3rd in the world not long ago and still places in international level bjj competitions. He is also a former SEAL. Of my other two judo coaches, one is a three time national champ, and the other competes nationally, internationalyl and world level in judo and sambo. He is also a "master of sport" title holder in sambo. my bjj coach places in the top two in almost every tourney across the country that he enters. My thai boxing coach competes nationally. We have several cops at our school, and one guy who is an ATF agent.

Now that we are done comparing wang sizes, I think it's hilarious that the guys you are talking about are cross trained. Where are the pure WC guys? why was only one mentioned?


Your knowledge of our Wing Chun is based on what?

On what I've seen and experienced, the same as your knowledge (or lack thereof) of sport fighting. When I was training longfist, there was a guy there who had trained WC for about 10 years. I also had sporadic dealings with another WC instructor - the one I mentioned got beaten in a continuous fighting tourney.

I have met many good fighters of all sorts since the 1960's in all arts. I'm no fool and wouldn't tell anyone their club members can't fight.

That's probably they wisest thing you've said on this thread.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun


How am I elitist?

"A true Wing Chun master should be better than a kickboxer....."

"All top Kung Fu fighting masters were better than kickboxers....."

"I agree. A wing Chun master should be better otherwise he is not a master."

Do I need to clarify further?

[YongChun]

Originally posted by SevenStar


Actually SevenStar, I don't know why you are trying to argue with me. I never cut your members down or you down. I don't know you or your members. I just reported on my training experiences and our results. I believe to train normal Wing Chun or classical Hung style or classical anything and then spar with each other and then spar outside of the club. Just our time frames are longer than Terrence likes. That's about it.

I don't claim Wing Chun is the best or that any other art is no good. I advocate learning from other fighters including Thai boxers, boxers, Wrestlers etc. We went through a period where we regularly attended workshops in any kind of art and tried to use their stuff and use it to re-evaluate our Wing Chun training.

We have had a lot of successes with our Wing Chun but no more than anyone else. But I don't think our Wing Chun method was good in comparison with Emin Boztepe, Kenneth Chung and Gary Lam (and maybe a lot of others).

We never had anyone who could compete in today's Mixed Martial arts environment at a high level (Shamrock and company).

For me I respect all good fighters no matter what their background. We constantly re-evaluate our training methods based on results achieved against other arts or on the street. If there are no good results then we change.

We have never made any claims about anything regarding our skills. I think all members have the right to express opinions without getting challenged or called names. However someone else trains, doesn't matter to me. Who cares. If it works for them then that's very good.

[YongChun]

SevenStar:

IMO, that's flawed. Why not learn techniques and condition simultaneously?

instead, do not worry about the form so soon. since you would be learning the techniques while you were conditioning, then you would be working various techniques from the form, drilling them and receiving corrections on them. You would then do more advanced drilling where your partner attacks as his own pace and you respond with specific techniques.

the conditioning should never stop.

that would begine about 3-4 months into training.

step in the ring - local and small time competitions. this would happen after approx. 1 year.

enter bigger competitions - regional, national, international, etc. turn pro of you desire.

Ray:

Yes I agree with that method as well. No argument there.

Ray

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Edmund
Exactly.
How can you be a "master" if you don't understand the simplest fighting skills that you see in kickboxing all the time?



Yes, everyone would agree with that. Ray

[Edmund]

Originally posted by YongChun

A Wing Chun practitioner is good or no good. I believe Gary Lam is good because I saw his videos and trust that Ernie knows what he is talking about. You don’t need to add things because Wing Chun is good enough. The WT people didn’t need to add anything to Wing Chun. They just improved the training method.


With that attitude you should never do any cross training.
Since pure WC is already good enough at everything.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by YongChun
Originally posted by Edmund
Then they certainly were not quality wing Chun guys. If they won, then they were quality Wing Chun guys. People like Gary Lam have managed to win but he is not the only one who ever did that.
SevenStar said:
That's the single, biggest load of BS I've ever heard. They weren' quality because they lost? wake up...

Ray says:
Something got lost in the translation. I think the original statement was that so called Wing Chun masters were no good because they all lost.

Terrence says that proves they are not really wing Chun masters. So I am just agreeing with Terrence. I thought you were on the side of Terrence in this great debate?

To me winning or losing doesn't really determine quality totally because all good boxers lose and yet they are still quality fighters. Most animals fight very well but they all lose eventually to some other animal.

All these arguments however started because Terrence talked about the Wing Chun people who just do forms and Chi sau and can't fight. Well to me they are not masters then. Isn't that what you guys are also saying? Are you changing your mind about that or what?

Who is saying what now anyway?

I think let's get back to Terrences statement that to be a fighter you have to fight (to stay on course). No argument there. There we are finished with this topic!

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
SevenStar:

IMO, that's flawed. Why not learn techniques and condition simultaneously?

instead, do not worry about the form so soon. since you would be learning the techniques while you were conditioning, then you would be working various techniques from the form, drilling them and receiving corrections on them. You would then do more advanced drilling where your partner attacks as his own pace and you respond with specific techniques.

the conditioning should never stop.

that would begine about 3-4 months into training.

step in the ring - local and small time competitions. this would happen after approx. 1 year.

enter bigger competitions - regional, national, international, etc. turn pro of you desire.

Ray:

Yes I agree with that method as well. No argument there.

Ray

Out of curiosity, why don't you guys train that way?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
Actually SevenStar, I don't know why you are trying to argue with me. I never cut your members down or you down. I don't know you or your members. I just reported on my training experiences and our results. I believe to train normal Wing Chun or classical Hung style or classical anything and then spar with each other and then spar outside of the club. Just our time frames are longer than Terrence likes. That's about it.

I don't claim Wing Chun is the best or that any other art is no good. I advocate learning from other fighters including Thai boxers, boxers, Wrestlers etc. We went through a period where we regularly attended workshops in any kind of art and tried to use their stuff and use it to re-evaluate our Wing Chun training.

We have had a lot of successes with our Wing Chun but no more than anyone else. But I don't think our Wing Chun method was good in comparison with Emin Boztepe, Kenneth Chung and Gary Lam (and maybe a lot of others).

We never had anyone who could compete in today's Mixed Martial arts environment at a high level (Shamrock and company).

For me I respect all good fighters no matter what their background. We constantly re-evaluate our training methods based on results achieved against other arts or on the street. If there are no good results then we change.

We have never made any claims about anything regarding our skills. I think all members have the right to express opinions without getting challenged or called names. However someone else trains, doesn't matter to me. Who cares. If it works for them then that's very good.

this is a reasonable post... we are now getting somewhere. I was "arguing" because of some of the comments you make. specifically, the ones I have quoted several times where you state blanket assumtions about wc and sport fighting.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by SevenStar
Out of curiosity, why don't you guys train that way?

Hi SevenStar,

We have trained like that before. But every once in awhile you get a different student mix with different backgrounds. So actually our training is always different. Sometimes I have a class of people who aren't interested in fighting. Sometimes I get a class of people who already were fighters in some other arts. So I find they all have different training needs. So I really don't have arguments with people it's just that we have different kinds of students with different tastes. Even now we have some that like to cross train. We have some that just like to hit the pads and spar and not do any forms or chi sau. We have others that just like Chi sau. All those guys train that way at the same time. I don't run a large school with lots of students these days. So it's not easy to have a standardized program.

Most students now just come about once a week which is not very good but that's all their family situation and job situation allows. So if we trained the Thai boxing way then they would never have time to do any Wing Chun.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by SevenStar
this is a reasonable post... we are now getting somewhere. I was "arguing" because of some of the comments you make. specifically, the ones I have quoted several times where you state blanket assumtions about wc and sport fighting.

Sorry my writing skills and logic are sometimes lacking when I quickly type up a post.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
Hi SevenStar,

We have trained like that before. But every once in awhile you get a different student mix with different backgrounds. So actually our training is always different. Sometimes I have a class of people who aren't interested in fighting. Sometimes I get a class of people who already were fighters in some other arts. So I find they all have different training needs. So I really don't have arguments with people it's just that we have different kinds of students with different tastes. Even now we have some that like to cross train. We have some that just like to hit the pads and spar and not do any forms or chi sau. We have others that just like Chi sau. All those guys train that way at the same time. I don't run a large school with lots of students these days. So it's not easy to have a standardized program.

Most students now just come about once a week which is not very good but that's all their family situation and job situation allows. So if we trained the Thai boxing way then they would never have time to do any Wing Chun.

how long are the classes?

[YongChun]

Originally posted by SevenStar
how long are the classes?

Our classes are two hours long. Members can come up to three days a week but nearly all come just once. One person comes three days a week and two come twice a week. Others like police come occasionally now because they are always on shift work. It's not easy to satisfy everyone's needs. For example you might have a 12 year old girl who doesn't know much and an Olympic calibre Judo guy. To match them up doesn't help either too much but sometimes such a match occurs and so the Judo guy is very nice and tries to help out the 12 year old however that deeply cuts into his valuable training time. We have a lot of mismatches like that because the club is too small and students aren't all regular. If students came three days a week and attended regularly, then we could have a great program going that would incorporate suggestions from these discussions but now we don't have that. I years gone by we had a good mix of people at similar levels and that's when we entertained different masters to help out and in the end just stuck mainly to one that everyone liked. We have been sort of leaderless for a long time. No big Wing Chun expert close by and not enough members to support a master to come up regularly. So we do what we can.

[t_niehoff]

Tydive wrote:

I can agree with you to a point, but after that you are way to dogmatic. Nothing is quite as effective as full contact to see what works... however practicing the forms gives you the tools to use in a fight. Discounting the value of forms and spar is just as silly as saying that full contact does not have value.

**There are three necessary steps that all martial arts follow: step 1, learn the form (technique); step 2, drill it; and step 3, put it into fighting. The forms are necessary as they provide us the tools so as to enable us to be able to do the drills (you can't do chi sao without tan, bong, and fook).

Fighting does not mean that you will get any better. You still need to do the work and learn so that you do more than just flail.

**Progress in any physical activity requires more than just doing the activity itself but hinges on doing the activity. You're right, you can get in the pool all the time but it won't necessarily make you a great swimmer (although you will learn to swim). On the other hand, you can't be a great swimmer without getting in the pool. There's no point talking about what these "other" things are with folks that never get in the water though.

I have never been in a street fight that lasted more than 10 seconds... I can't say I learned much from any of them. Practice is where you learn, street (or ring) is where you apply what you learned.

**Two things -- first of all, a "street fight" is not much of a challenge of skills since the majority of people have little to no training, are out of shape, etc. We don't measure skill in any physical activity, including fighting, based on how well we can do against the unskilled but against the skilled. Someone could punch the heavy bag, hit the focus mitts, etc., and have an advantage against some schmuck in the street; he'd get destroyed by a good boxer (someone who actually boxed and didn't just do drills) though. Second, application *is* practice. Boxers, wrestlers, bjjers, etc. all fight (application) as part of their training (practice). You actually learn a great deal during application -- incuding application. And you'll never learn application without fighting.

Now, how about talking about the ART of Martial Arts? The science of Boxing?

**The "art" is in the performance; there's no point discussing the "science" (the how's and why's) if someone isn't doing the activity since they (the how's and why's) depend on having a certain experience.

-----------------------------

YongChun wrote:

Terrence says:
1. And once they stop fighting, their skill decreases.

Too bad Gary Lam, Emin Boztepe and most of the other masters in martial art have stopped fighting. Now they are all washed up and can’t fight anymore. What a shame.

**Lou Duba is a great boxing trainer, but that doesn't mean he's a great fighter. When fighters stop fighting they lose their timing, conditioning, etc. This is true of any physical activity (stop doing the activity, and your skill declines) -- why do you *believe* that martial arts are somehow different? It's magical thinking.

Terrence says:
2. Tell me, David, who has CXW ever fought? This is reputedly the "best" guy in TJQ -- who has he ever fought? A "world-class martial artist" who has never fought -- do you see the contradiction?

Who has Yip Man every fought? Who has the founder of Aikido ever fought that we have heard of? Who had Funakoshi fought?

**We don't know how good someone is if they don't fight other skilled folks (skill is relative, and world-class fighters can "hang" with other world-class fighters). But we do know that if they never fight as part of their training, they can't develop significantly better fighting skills. Why do you buy into reputations?

I read that Nadi was the world’s best fencer however who has he ever fought that I heard of?

**It doesn't matter that you never heard of them, but Aldo Nadi was the world professional fencing champion -- he fenced against all the world's best and consistently beat them (his record is available). He was a fencing master, where the title "master" is conferred by performance standards, not one's followers. Moreoever, he was willing and able to step out onto the piste and prove his ability on demand -- he even fought duels!

Who has Bruce Lee fought?

**At least he fought (sparred) regularly as part of his training. And he was willing, like Nadi, to step up and prove what he could do.


No one has fought the tough guys around here. Why is everyone learning from these washed up people who have never fought anyone that we recognize? Millions of people must be really stupid to do this? Hey – there doesn’t seem to be one Wing Chun fighting champion around who has every fought anyone that counts. That really sucks.

**Many people buy into -- because they want to believe it -- that someone can learn to become a good fighter without fighting, and where there is a demand, there will be people ready and willing to fill that demand (even if it is illusory) for money. Millions of people practice tai ji around the world too -- you'd think out of millions that one would be produced that could successfully fight in a NHB but it hasn't happened. They are practicing nonmartial arts. They can't become better fighters without fighting, and they haven't! But we don't need to learn WCK or any martial art from world-class fighters, the method can be learned from anyone (anyone can show you the tools of boxing, for example) but if the practitioner ever wants to increase their fighting performance (develop the skill to use those tools, become a good boxer), they need to fight as part of their training. This isn't rocket science. The activity we're allegedly training to do is fight. If someone never does that activity, how in the world can they expect to increase their performance at that activity? It is magical thinking (somehow some magic will occur and I'l be transformed into a good fighter). And certainly, a instructor that has also fought will be able to provide more guidance than someone who hasn't.

Regards,

Terence

[t_niehoff]

As an afterthought,

Fencing is a good example of what I've been discussing --

A student begins with (step 1) learning the tools of fencing, how to hold the sword, the lunge, parries, footwork, etc. Some of these vary, along with strategies and tactics, based on the "school" of fencing (the approach): the Italian, French, Spanish, etc. Then they practice those, getting the "feel" of those tools and strategies, through drills and exercises (step 2, "the lesson"). Finally, they "bout" (step 3, fight), actually fence. (Same progression as an martial art -- boxing, wrestling, bjj, etc.). No fencer would suggest that they could develop significant fencing skill doing just steps one and two. A beginner-level fencer may be able to defeat a nonfencer (particularly one without sigfificant physical advantages) in a bout (the references to successful "streetfights" by WCK practitioners) since they have more familiariity with the sword. But no one would suggest that they have good fencing skill. (Bluebelts in BJJ would most likely win most streetfights too, but they don't have high-level BJJ).

If one stops "bouting", fencing, they lose their timing, distance, conditioning, etc.; their skill declines. And one can certainly learn the tools of fencing from someone what has gone through steps 1 and 2 even if that person has never "bouted" to any degree. (There are actually some good self-taught fencers). But the level of their fencing skill will depend upon bouting, and is in fact guaged/measured by their bouting.

Folks can argue that fencing isn't true sword fighting ("a real sword fight") since it doesn't involve actual fatalities. But that misses the point -- the same fencing skills (parries, lunge, disengages, etc.) are at work on the piste (in the academy or studio) as would be on the street. One either has fencing skill that they can use in fencing, regardless of the venue, or they don't. There isn't some "secret, special" street swordfighting skills. Sure fencing on the piste isn't swordfighting on the "street" but is the safest way (they don't need to actually stab each other) to learn to become a better fencer, to develop greater fending skills. Do fencers practice dealing with multiple attackers? Well, if they can't fence well against one person, they aren't going to be able to fence against two. ;)

Being able to do the drills well doesn't mean one is a good fencer. Being able to fence well (hold their own against other good fencers) is what makes one a good fencer. If someone goes to a fencing school, the "maestre" should be willing and able to step out on the piste and show what he can do. And I have no problem with someone that says, "I'm not a good fencer, but I can teach you the method (tools, drills, etc.)." But to start talking about folks that never fence as great fencers is ludicrous.

Regards,

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yongchun (Ray):

Your refusal to see the facts when your arguments are refuted - and constantly trying to have it both ways with the points you make - going back and forth between agreeing with those who are refuting you and then explaining why you disagree - is becoming disengenuous (not totally honest).

You are clinging to the notion that there is a classical CMA superiority - both in fighting strategy and training methods - because it suits your predisposition...but the facts about the training methods used by arts like boxing, Muay Thai, and Kickboxing - and how those methods could be of benefit to wing chun...both in terms of improving wing chun fighting skills as well as exposing certain wing chun weaknesses (both technique wise and training method wise...ie. - too much time spent doing forms and chi sao, immobile footwork, kicking techniques that ARE crappy)...

the facts concerning these other arts have been proven time and time again. (And it's not just the training methods that can be of so much benefit to wing chun fighters - the footwork, attacking strategies, kicking techniques, etc. of "classical" wing chun are not quite up to speed...and the people Andrew Nerlich mentioned who have done well in competitions come from a William Cheung background...where the footwork is more mobile than the "classical" wing chun approach...Gary Lam was trained by Wong Shun Leung - who did some boxing...Ernie (trained by Gary) uses an eclectic approach to footwork...the WT people (ever seen a Boztepe tape?)...also advocate a more mobile footwork than the "classical" wing chun approach...

and the training methods (ie. - hard sparring, bag/mitt/shield work, etc.) talked about on this thread are also used (to my knowledge ) by most - if not all - of the "non classical" wing chun people I just mentioned.

(You could argue that Wong Shun Leung came from the "classical" approach - but the fact still remains that some of his more successful students and grandstudents - like Gary Lam - have a more flexible and eclectic view of fight training than what you and many others are advocating - so WSL must have left an impression with them that goes beyond the typical "classical" approach to wing chun).

Bottom line ? There ARE a lot of training methods (ie. - no frequent sparring/fighting), fight strategies, and techniques within the CMA world that just don't fly anymore.

And it is rare indeed when a wing chun fighter beats a GOOD boxer, kickboxer, or Thai boxer WITHOUT doing some similar types of training and rarer still if he's clinging to the straight-ahead footwork, attack strategies and kicking techniques.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Yongchun (Ray):

Your refusal to see the facts when your arguments are refuted - and constantly trying to have it both ways with the points you make - going back and forth between agreeing with those who are refuting you and then explaining why you disagree - is becoming disengenuous (not totally honest).

What facts don't I see. I sure don't understand that? I have known about the Thai results before some on this group were born. I wrestled as a kid before a lot of people were born. I know how good that stuff is. I have seen good fighters of all kinds the last 50 years. Is there something I didn't see? Sometimes both sides of an argument have something of value. I see good points in everyone's arguments not just my own. Right now, I am an easy guy to gang up on but that's ok, it gets discussion going and that's the main point of all this. Convincing me of anything is not important we only have a few students sometimes only one or two sometimes more.

As mentioned before I disagree with the timeframe for one and two the training recommended by others doesn't match with the profiles of the students we have. Also there are no BJJ clubs and big kickboxing clubs that invite people to come anytime to train with them. So a few have just joined them.

I never disagreed with methods as I mentioned I have or had students of all types. The kickboxing model doesn't fit all my students. One of my students is much older and another is a young small girl who doesn't know anything. The one might get a heart attack if too strenuous and the young girl is too fragile right now and not interested to kickbox.

Furthermore I have given examples of successes we have had which was good enough for those members who fought. It's not up to me to demand everyone kickbox. I can tell them the good points and then it is up to them.

I could have given many more examples but unless you know us, these examples are meaningless.

For modern competitive ring fighting all the talk makes good sense. There are many ways to train and not just one model. I have known from the 70's that Thai boxingis very very good but for me I don't like doing that stuff. Maybe if I was 20 or 30 then that would be great. My knee injury prevents me from doing much kicking. So it's not for me.

If you are limited by time to train, by injury or by interest then you train differently. Some of our members have come from competitive backgrounds and don't want to do that anymore because of age or injury or whatever.

Some who work in the police force still use their martial arts even though they now only train standard kind of Wing Chun which is form to warm up, Chi sau (a lot) and light sparring. They find this maintenance mode good enough. They have no interest to fight the Thai boxers.

People here depend on their jobs and don't enjoy getting injured.

William Cheung produces a certain kind fighter and a certain kind of Wing Chun. Not everyone is after that kind. Some people do like what Chen XiaoWang can do. Some people like what others in the Wing Chun world can do. Some of this kind of training does not involve kickboxing. It doesn't fit the timeframe of those approaches. After one has got the hang of some of these methods, for me the Kenneth Chung approach, then doing all the tournament and kickboxing fighting is fine. Kenneth Chung likes the Gracie approach and also like Chen XiaoWang and personally knows what he can do. I like the Gracie stuff too but don't want to train that right now because my Kenneth Chung type of Wing Chun sucks.

I thought the talk was finished but I guess not so we will keep going stating the obvious over and over again. It's called flogging a dead horse.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ray:

I don't dispute what you say about injuries - and how certain types of training methods and hard sparring are not for everybody.

But that shouldn't stop one from recognizing that the training methods in question (ie. - frequent hard sparring) produce better fighters.

Either they do - or they don't.

Without resorting to all the disclaimers (ie. - "sparring too soon will produce bad habits that can never be corrected").

That's not the point!

The point is...frequent hard sparring/conditioning, bag-mitt-shield work...along with an adequate amount of good wing chun knowledge and technique...

will ALWAYS produce better fighters than if the frequent hard sparring/training is not done.

Will you acknowledge that? A simple yes or no will do...if you don't mind.

[Ernie]

(You could argue that Wong Shun Leung came from the "classical" approach - but the fact still remains that some of his more successful students and grandstudents - like Gary Lam - have a more flexible and eclectic view of fight training than what you and many others are advocating - so WSL must have left an impression with them that goes beyond the typical "classical" approach to wing chun).


Not that I'm much on riding the lineage bus

But a WSL saying comes to mind [ don’t be a slave to wing chun , use it don’t let it use you ]

I see this as dividing the difference between the wing chun [ training system ] and the application of the skills gained from training , this requires self analysis , flight time in a non fixed [ non wing chun ] environment which will give you experience and adaptability

The training system guys [ keeping everything in house wing vs wing ] are in my eyes trapped by the system , not a bad thing the system is rich and you could entertain yourself for a life time investigating different aspects of it .
And as you get older and wish to preserve your body , not have some many training injuries I can see were this is the right path , or perhaps you really never were interested in the fighting application of wing chun and thus just really enjoy the in house training absolutely nothing wrong with that

Now fighters are a different breed as Gary said once fighters never retire there just waiting for their next fight
At his mid fifties and over weight Gary still goes toe to toe with anyone , even though he will openly admit he is not in fight shape and his body can no longer suffer the abuse of long fights must get it over quick
Now this is a guy that has fought and trained fighters and never once stepped foot in a hospital for any reason , the dude is just built tough

Hawkins in his mid sixties will still bare knuckled spar he loves it I know he has dropped me a few time with a big smile and a crazy laugh

Fighters are a different breed , same goes for inasanto still mixes it up all the time

You know a fighter when you meet one , you know a technician when you meet one world of difference


The problem is being honest just because you train in a fighting system doesn’t mean you’re a fighter , I don’t consider myself a fighter , there are those that say I am
I have no problem recognizing my limitations and know that I should not speak on things that I can not do for myself

Problem is people like to have opinions about things they can not do nor have personal experience so imaginations run wild
But this is life and people are funny

[YongChun]

My take on things comes from my experiences and observations. To me a western boxer is very good. I can never match them. Most Kung Fu teachers and fighters I have met love to watch boxing. To me Gracie Jujitsu is very good. I wrestled but I cannot match them. To me Booby Taboada’s Escrima, Illustrisimo Escrima, Rene Latosa Escrima, Remy Presas Arnis is very good. I can’t match those guys. To me how Jet Li moves is very good. I could never do that no matter how much I train. To me what Chen XiaoWang does is very top notch. I have trained a lot in Tai Chi before but what I know is probably what he learned in a week. I know Chen style is very difficult. I wanted to learn that then dividing my time between kickboxing and Tai Chi wouldn’t be a productive use of my time. I would concentrate 100% on Tai chi. To me Huang Jang Lee the 7th degree Taekwondo master kicks is very impressive. I would like to be able to kick like that but I can’t. My kicks are like what he learned in a week. If I wanted to do that, then I would follow whatever the normal Taekwondo training routine is and do it as much as I could. One of the most impressive people I have seen was a 13-year-old kid in my Hung style class. He trained 7 days a week, 5 hours a night for 5 years. I trained three days a week, three hours a night but my Hung style looked like crap in comparison. So I cannot match what this kid did. If I wanted to be like him I would have to invest that much time and maybe have a different body design. In my life I have met many martial artists that I admire. But life is short. I like to learn it all. But life is short. I don’t have time. I can only admire most things from a distance.

In Wing Chun I have met some very good fighters. Of the known teachers I have learned something from there is: Patrick Chow a student of Yip Man, Mark Lee of the Jiu Wan lineage, Johnny Yu of the Moy Yat lineage, Bob Stevenson from the Paul Lam (Leung Sheung) lineage, Chung Kwok Chow from the Leung Sheung lineage, Dr. Khoe from the Wang Kiu lineage, Wang Kiu (private student of Yip Man), Eddie Chong from the Kenneth Chung lineage, Kenneth Chung from the Leung Sheung lineage, Emin Boztepe from the Kernspecht/Leung Ting lineage, some William Cheung students, Tsui Shan Ting (Yip Man student) from a seminar, Wong Shun Leung (Yip Man student) from a seminar. I learned the most complete system from dr. Khoe. The system I liked the best was that of Kenneth Chung. One reason we are not as good as Kenneth Chung is that he trained 40 hours of Wing Chun a week and we don’t. Also he trained with top people and we don’t.

In the Kenneth Chung training methodology there is a lot to learn and kickboxing isn’t part of the training curriculum especially for the level we are at. In my mind Kenneth Chung is at least as good (I think better) than all the people I have met because I like his kind of Wing Chun. To me it has a lot of depth. I don’t think I can get to that depth even if I train seven days a week. I have already wasted my training time all these years by diversifying with Tai Chi, with Hung style with Escrima with other kinds of Wing Chun. Now I like to clamp down and work and work on the Kenneth Chung method. Doing kickboxing half the time will not help that endeavor. I am not looking to be a kickboxer or to beat a Thai boxer or to beat a Brazillian grappler right now. Someone in Keneenth Chung’s lineage is working on taking their art to see how to train it for competition the same way as Ernie will see how to take Gary Lam’s art and make it work against good competition. I am interested in these results but I am not interested to do this experiment. I am interested to improve on the path I am on.

For William Cheung’s approach, I never liked it. But I like his waterfront demonstration, it looks very good. I believe William Cheung has produced some top tournament fighters. I believe all those stories. But I still don’t like to learn that method. I don’t mind to learn Chen Tai Chi but I don’t have the time. I would rather concentrate on Kenneth Chung’s approach which is not easy since we don’t have a teacher of that approach here.

It would be easy for me to sign up at a kickboxing club since there is a world-class kickboxer here. We also have some good grapplers here. But I don’t have the time or the interest.

As far as violence goes, we have maybe 3 or 4 murders a year. Some cities have more than a thousand. Some cities are full of gangs. I don’t come from that kind of world and hence am not motivated by fear. I love martial art even Wu Shu where they don’t really fight. I appreciate most martial arts including the ones that people call useless like Tai Chi, Aikido and Ba Gua. So lots to train and learn, too little time. If some can do quality Wing Chun and add kickboxing, Thai boxing, wrestling, stick and knife fighting to their repertoire then that’s great. For me I no longer have the time. I know what I can do and what I can’t.

I am of the opinion that you should learn the classical way and after that go and fight. If I can achieve just a little of the skill that people had who trained in that way, then I will be very happy. Maybe Thai ring fighting is like calculus. I am at the arithmetic stage of fighting and can’t jump to calculus until I have mastered the Algebra of fighting.

If someone thinks Kenneth Chung could improve his teaching methods by incorporating Thai boxing and Brazillian Jujitsu then that is for him to decide. If he thinks it is good and shows it produces better results, then I will listen.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun


The point is...frequent hard sparring/conditioning, bag-mitt-shield work...along with an adequate amount of good wing chun knowledge and technique...

will ALWAYS produce better fighters than if the frequent hard sparring/training is not done.

Will you acknowledge that? A simple yes or no will do...if you don't mind.

There is never a simple yes or no like in a trial. Did you kill the guy? Yes, but .....

Doing that at the right time will ALWAYS produce a better fighter. From my experience only, doing that at the wrong time has produced a worse quality fighter.

The word quality has different meanings. For example some people would consider Emin Boztepe a very good fighter. But those same people may not look upon what he does as quality Wing Chun. Doing the heavy hard sparring/conditioning would produce a fighter of his calibre but not one that has the attributes of Chen XiaoWang or Kenneth Chung (for lack of other examples I can think of at the moment).

If those guys practiced hard sparring all the time then they would have additional skills and be better fighters from a kickboxing point of view. But depending on the definition of quality, they might be worse fighters.

I don't know if they would be better or worse in certain fighting situations. I don't know if any of the top martial artists that China ever produced anyone that can beat a standard Thai boxer. You would have to check with each Kung Fu style. Maybe there are a thousand or more.

I know the people they sent over there didn't do well in the 70's. They never trained properly. Even some of Yip Man's best students lost. I have heard some other people they sent over there later did do well but maybe they couldn't do so consistently.

I have no knowledge of those things and can't make a meanigful comment on that because it is not in my world of experience. I can't judge if Mike Tyson can beat all of today's so called Kung Fu masters in a ring fight or in a street fight. If it is a ring fight with boxing rules, then I would give the odds to Mike Tyson. I don't know what kinds of fighters China has and don't like to have a blanket statement like all Kung Fu sucks. All of us are part of the Kung Fu world. So then we would all suck.

[Tydive]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
A student begins with (step 1) learning the tools of fencing, how to hold the sword, the lunge, parries, footwork, etc. Some of these vary, along with strategies and tactics, based on the "school" of fencing (the approach): the Italian, French, Spanish, etc. Then they practice those, getting the "feel" of those tools and strategies, through drills and exercises (step 2, "the lesson"). Finally, they "bout" (step 3, fight), actually fence. (Same progression as an martial art -- boxing, wrestling, bjj, etc.). No fencer would suggest that they could develop significant fencing skill doing just steps one and two. A beginner-level fencer may be able to defeat a nonfencer (particularly one without sigfificant physical advantages) in a bout (the references to successful "streetfights" by WCK practitioners) since they have more familiariity with the sword. But no one would suggest that they have good fencing skill. (Bluebelts in BJJ would most likely win most streetfights too, but they don't have high-level BJJ).

You are dead on target here.

If one stops "bouting", fencing, they lose their timing, distance, conditioning, etc.; their skill declines.

Yep. It does not take long to lose your touch. Even with forms and wall practice nothing takes the place of constant blade to blade work.


Folks can argue that fencing isn't true sword fighting ("a real sword fight") since it doesn't involve actual fatalities. But that misses the point -- the same fencing skills (parries, lunge, disengages, etc.) are at work on the piste (in the academy or studio) as would be on the street. One either has fencing skill that they can use in fencing, regardless of the venue, or they don't. There isn't some "secret, special" street swordfighting skills. Sure fencing on the piste isn't swordfighting on the "street" but is the safest way (they don't need to actually stab each other) to learn to become a better fencer, to develop greater fending skills. Do fencers practice dealing with multiple attackers? Well, if they can't fence well against one person, they aren't going to be able to fence against two. ;) We only practice multi attackers and such in the parking lot of a pub, usually after a few beers... or at lest not at the Salle.

Being able to do the drills well doesn't mean one is a good fencer. Being able to fence well (hold their own against other good fencers) is what makes one a good fencer. If someone goes to a fencing school, the "maestre" should be willing and able to step out on the piste and show what he can do. And I have no problem with someone that says, "I'm not a good fencer, but I can teach you the method (tools, drills, etc.)." But to start talking about folks that never fence as great fencers is ludicrous.

Replace the word fencer for any other MA and you have made your point very well. I think my misunderstanding was your use of the word "fight". If you count bouts of any kind and hard sparring as "fighting" then I don't see how a reasonable person can argue with that.

From my experience in bouts I can say that I have learned most of my skills either on the strip, mat or ring. Working with teammates or against opponents. As opposed to my "fights" where I was a bouncer etc... where I did not learn much but got to apply what I knew.

[Ernie]

Someone in Keneenth Chung’s lineage is working on taking their art to see how to train it for competition the same way as Ernie will see how to take Gary Lam’s art and make it work against good competition.


Ray

thanks for positive words about gary and what crazy things i experiment with .

but ,

the thing about Gary's approach is i don't need to to take to another level in application

it is designed with application in mind

we don't waste time on things that don't directly connect to fighting application [ what ever fighting means to you , i think street others ring the ring is just another form of chi sau for me :D ]

i think this comes from WSL way of thinking

as Ken's way suits you , the more direct cut out all the non essentials suits me

this is not good bad or better than just a training method fitting the individual

now back to packing :cool:

[t_niehoff]

crimonsonking wrote:

Sorry if we're going over old ground here, but you're leading the way...

Could you briefly explain to me exactly what you percieve to be the difference between high intensity gor sao (free chi sao) practice, and say, a fencing "bout", boxing, rolling in bjj, randori in judo, or NHB?

**When you partake in gor sao, are you really "behaving" as you would in a fight (do you really think you could fight like that)? Is your training partner "behaving" as he would in a genuine fight? If you think so, then fighting should be no problem as you're already doing it. So then I suggest you try it and see if that is indeed the case. The confusion stems from mistaking the "randomness" of the drill with realism -- it's not. When I was doing escrima, for example, we'd do a drill called sumbrada, which begins as a "flow pattern" sequence but where one gradually adds variability into the drill until it becomes more and more random (just like chi sao). Some people get very good at the drill, with fast and furious exchanges that look great -- especially at demos. If you saw someone who was good at the drill (and I became good at the drill), you might think they could really fight with the stick. But that's not the case -- as experience has repeatedly proven -- because sumbrada is a drill, not fighting. There are a host of variables that the drill excludes (so as to focus on what the drill emphasizes -- the point of a drill; by excluding some variables, it permits us to focus on others and develop those aspects to some degree). And it is difficult to appreciate those variables without the experience (actually stick fighting). No one that fights, particularly with skilled fighters, will tell you that chi sao or gor sao is anything like fighting.

Regards,

Terence

[kj]

Originally posted by Ernie
the thing about Gary's approach is i don't need to to take to another level in application

it is designed with application in mind

we don't waste time on things that don't directly connect to fighting application [ what ever fighting means to you , i think street others ring the ring is just another form of chi sau for me :D ]

i think this comes from WSL way of thinking


I believe this is true of WSL and Gary, though I don't believe they are the only ones (just mainly the ones we talk of that way).


as Ken's way suits you , the more direct cut out all the non essentials suits me

I don't think it's either/or.

FWLIW, I see a great deal in common between the nature of Gary's work and ours. From a strictly subjective POV, that's probably one of the reasons I can so readily admire it. Gary couldn't do some of the stuff he does without either an explicit or intrinsic understanding of fundamentals. I don't often see people as "together" as Gary. We (i.e., "yours" and "mine") undoubtedly differ in details, and certainly as individuals we will vary in development, yet my sense is of "singing from the same song book."

I also agree about trimming out non-essentials. The caveat is that there are subjective, qualitative, contextual, and experiential elements as to what is and isn't essential, explaining in part why reasonable people differ in some details.


this is not good bad or better than just a training method fitting the individual

I completely agree.


now back to packing :cool:

Color me jealous (about Hawaii, not the packing).

Regards,
- kj

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

The word quality has different meanings. For example some people would consider Emin Boztepe a very good fighter. But those same people may not look upon what he does as quality Wing Chun.

**Someone can be a great fighter and have absolutely no WCK skills -- Rickson Gracie for example. But one can't be good at WCK and not be a good fighter -- that's an oxymoron (to be good at WCK means to be able to fight well). Part of the problem stems from nonfighter/theoreticans coming up with notions of what they think good WCK should "look" like rather than focusing on performance (can they make it work). So we get "yeah, he can fight but he looks crappy and has poor WCK" from folks that couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.

Doing the heavy hard sparring/conditioning would produce a fighter of his calibre but not one that has the attributes of Chen XiaoWang or Kenneth Chung (for lack of other examples I can think of at the moment).

**CXW and CK don't have any fighting attributes (unless they fight as part of their training, and I haven't heard that they do), they have demo/drill attributes (just like those guys that can take punches to the throat or kicks to the groin in demos -- if they are so impervious, why don't they fight? Because they are demo attributes and would get killed in a fight.). "Sensitivity" in push hands or chi sao doesn't give one sensitivity in fighting, because sensitivity is an intensity-dependent attribute; timing can only be gained by fighting, not from chi sao; fighting condition only comes from fighting; etc.

Regards,

Terence

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
(to be good at WCK means to be able to fight well).

Perhaps ironically, I agree with much of what you say. However, I don't agree with this. Only fighting is fighting. WCK is a system comprised of concepts, principles and a training method. While WCK is preparation for fighting, it is not in and of itself fighting. I believe this difference in definitions is the fundamental rub in the endless bantering. This isn't a new idea, though I haven't seen anyone bring it up for awhile. WCK does not equate to fighting any more than fencing equates to fighting.

Regards,
- kj

[t_niehoff]

KJ wrote:

Perhaps ironically, I agree with much of what you say. However, I don't agree with this. Only fighting is fighting. WCK is a system comprised of concepts, principles and a training method.

**Yes, to make us better fighters -- that's the purpose of the training and the concepts and the principles, etc. If you know the forms, the drills, the concpets, and can't fight, you don't have "good" WCK, you have merely learned the method. To apply the method is to fight. You can't say someone is a good boxer but can't box or someone has good BJJ but always gets tapped. It is the performance (fighting) that matters.

While WCK is preparation for fighting, it is not in and of itself fighting. I believe this difference in definitions is the fundamental rub in the endless bantering. This isn't a new idea, though I haven't seen anyone bring it up for awhile. WCK does not equate to fighting any more than fencing equates to fighting.

**Fencing is swordfighting. The french school is a method of fencing (an approach to fencing and a means to train that approach), just like WCK is a method of fighting (an approach to fighting and a means of training that approach). While someone can swordfight without being of the french school or fight without being of the WCK school, their ability in either is measured by their application (fencing or fighting). No one would say that someone is a good fencer if they can't get out on the piste and fence. Likewise, no one is good at WCK that can't step up and fight well.

Regards,

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Wing Chun footwork can teach you to cover a good distance fast, as for the rest, knowing when you dont need to move is the key. Oh, and nice thumbs up you gave Boztepe after all that hoo haa a little while ago lol."
(crimsonking)

As for Boztepe...on the thread you alluded to - I never said he couldn't fight; on the contrary, I said that I thought he was a good fighter - perhaps very good. And after seeing one of his tapes where he does some light but competitive sparring - it was clear that he's not adverse to using a more mobile footwork (and other training methods)...that other, more classical approaches to wing chun don't use.

My issues with Boztepe that were talked about on that thread concerned other things...not whether or not he can fight.

But the assertion that... "Wing Chun footwork can teach you to cover a good distance fast, as for the rest, knowing when you dont need to move is the key."....

those two statements are meant to cover a multitude of fighting scenarios - but they don't.

Too simplistic....waaaay too simplistic.

[kj]

I hear you, Terence. I just don't agree with this particular piece of logic in which you conclude that WCK and fighting are the same thing.

As I've contended so many times, the dialog might go somewhere if there was less equivocation on what fighting really is. E.g., if Ernie, Andrew or Gary do it then it can be considered in the fighting category, but if Ray or Kenneth do the same kind of thing then it cannot be considered in the fighting category. There needs to be something other than personality, training preference, or writing style as criteria for what does and does not constitute an actual fight.

Regards,
- kj

[reneritchie]

The funny thing is, if you go to a BJJ board, you will see people arguing about whether they need to compete, need to do MMA, need to fight, etc.

Not everyone trains for the same reason, but when people are dishonest about the purpose of their training in some macho attempt to impress students or manufacture a rep, it does bad things to the art.

Personally, I can't stand it when someone claims their sifu is the best at 'having fun, staying a little fit, and lightly rolling' in world, when we all know they're really some lame deadly NHB fighter, 400-1 (really, really drunk), and reigning UFC absolute champ...

[YongChun]

In the 1980's we went through all these arguments endlessly as well. Two students left our club and moved to Vancouver. One went to study Taekwondo. The other just competed in all the tournaments over there. He was the one who beat five black belts with his dry land swimming Wing Chun.

When these guys got back, they would tell every one we should fight in the Vancouver tournaments or else we aren't learning anything. One brought over some sparring stuff to prove his point. So we all put that stuff on and went at it. For the most part he didn't have any big advantage over the senior people because he couldn't easily get in. No one was any slower than him so when he blasted away he just got counter punched the same time. He no longer tried to snow people with chain punches because Karate people wised up to that.

The Taekwondo guy was having the same argument with one of our members. So he argued she needs to enter the competitions in Vancouver. She said what for? He said: or else you won't be able to fight. Your Wing Chun will be no good. She said: who cares, why don't you go and fight the Thais then or go and enter a war if you like fighting so much. He said: your stupid and know nothing. He said: you know, in Taekwondo even from this close distance of 6 inches away, I can kick you in your head. I don't need distance. She said, let's see. He went to kick she shoved him into the wall, he hit his head. That ended the argument for that particular day.

However she was not scared to put the gloves on because she also fought with the other tournament fighter. The fight just looked like a mess. Her reflexes were faster than his but he was much stronger and faster on his feet. But as soon as he was in range they hit each other simultaneously.

Then she went to Japan and tried Naginata and found that her Wing Chun spear fighting skill could match them. We regularly trained spear fighting in those days. So in that competition she did well. YW also went to a Wing Chun club there and had a close range fight with everyone there. She did ok until she met a very tall guy from the USA who had little control a relative novice. She realized he wanted to fight for real and didn't want his club to lose face. So hesitated in her actions for a second. In that time frame he punched her in the stomach very hard causing her to double over and then he quickly turned and broke her nose with an elbow technique. They all laughed until they saw a pool of blood and then started to worry. So they quickly drove her to the hospital to get her nose fixed.

Our teacher at the time (1982) was Dr. Khoe who was a student of Wang Kiu. Wang Kiu was a private student of Yip Man. He arranged many of the matches that Wong Shun Leung had. Dr. Khoe was a private student of Wang Kiu. He studied the traditional way in Wang Kiu's kitchen getting thrown into things, pushed, pulled and jerked around from all angles. There was no step-by-step training methodology. You just fought and got corrected along the way.

After he learned this stuff he went back to Taekwondo to try it out against some good people. He said when he was nervous his natural instincts would be to rush in. So he did that and always was successful. The Taekwondo people just said he had very fast hands. At that time a couple of Wang Kiu's students I heard were heavily into sparring and competition and didn't do much of any kind of Chi sau. They reported a 75% success rate against Taekwondo in competition. I hear Wang Kiu is now retired.

The question of training in tournaments and competition came up a lot. People with less than a year of Wing Chun wanted to do it and did. Our teacher Dr. Khoe he said it was a hard way to learn how to fight. He said the best route from his experience was to pack in the Wing Chun methodology first and then go out and spar and compete.

Our club was in Victoria and his was in Vancouver so our paths were not always the same. Without the lack of a good leader we naturally went the kickboxing way mixed in with what Wing Chun we knew. That's the easiest way. Then we went to Vancouver to fight against Dr. Khoe's students. Our feeling was that we were just as good. Dr. Khoe's feeling was that I created some monsters with garbage Wing Chun and that these people could never be repaired in the future like a half-baked muffin that's taken out of the oven too soon. So he chewed me out for that and then things went downhill from that point until we eventually split. Our Wing Chun was fast and furious but never reached the elegance of Dr. Khoe's methods and certainly were far from Kenneth Chung's methods.

After that we met both Emin Boztepe and Kenneth Chung. Emin's marketing approach was to tell us that our Wing Chun was garbage, Ken's marketing approach was to tell us he could try to help us improve. I wrote up some of the details and my impressions of the meeting on the net. I thought then and now that both were very good.

I liked Kenneth Chung’s approach more than the approaches of anyone else I had ever met. I felt that Emin was the best fighter against all the modern kind of fighting arts but didn't have what people like Chen XiaoWang, Feng or Kenneth Chung had. I know on the net both Emin and Ken have been heavily criticized. Whether what CXW, FQ or KC have is worth having is a whole other debate. But to us it is. Some people like apples and some like oranges.

Our members were really 50/50 about whose approach we wanted to follow. The newer members all wanted to follow Emin Boztepe's approach and the senior members liked to follow the Kenneth Chung approach. So we made a decision and half the club quit. That's the dangers of getting experts up. However everyone agreed Emin was a good fighter. We were not concerned with who could beat the other or who could beat up a Thai boxer. Maybe neither could, maybe both could but relative to our skill level, they were both several levels above us so those questions really were not relevant to us. Both could make us better than we were but along different paths.

I found Emin's system more complex and maybe more complete in that he was part of the Leung Ting franchise system with 12 student levels and 12 technician levels and many many things to learn. But complete is maybe the wrong word. Someone can be more complete in their art, have more depth but others have more width.

My Dr. Khoe method was relatively simple. However Ken's method was far simpler. He said our hands were too flowery. That’s no reflection on my teacher but only on us. Ken had no drills, no levels, no pre-arranged techniques just a very solid foundation, simple hands, very rooted and could deliver very short range power. When you are used to drills and suddenly there are no drills then it throws you off. It takes time to adjust. By my standards developed from the Wang Kiu lineage, Ken had all the goods and more. That's what he achieved so far from his 20,000 hours of training. What he didn't know wasn't relevant to us because everything we learned he learned in less than a year.

Ken himself never considered himself a master and neither did Wang Kiu. Ken said he was is constantly growing in his art. He said maybe this year I will tell you this but next year may have a totally different opinion. He was different everytime I met him but always better than before. At his level he has his own path and merely shares what he learned from his journey. Where we end up he will end up, nobody knows. He never pushed his methodology on us in a dogmatic way. He never said it was the only way. Ken had nothing but good things to say about the Gracies.

Quite practically in Ken’s methodology, we feel, it doesn't help us to spend half the time in a kickboxing gym. Perhaps if Ken advised us to do that we would have done that. Ken's art is very detailed and we find it difficult to acquire. Training in kickboxing would be much easier because all the methods are there for everyone to see. However our members just don't happen to want that approach. Maybe they want to chase the unattainable dream? The joy is in the chase.

For a good fighter, it shouldn't be either do forms and chi sau OR fight. All parts should be trained at the right time. It's a time management thing. Some teachers think that learning should be step by step and others think it should be holographic where you learn every thing at once. When I studied Tai chi they had these kinds of discussions. One approach was 3 years form, three years pushing hands, three years applications, and then fighting with a constant review of the basics. Another approach was to do all of the above at once. One teacher who tried the latter approach found no defect in this non-traditional method. The lessons in life are learned in both ways.

For me, I am in no position to judge either Emin Boztepe or Kenneth Chung to say whose method will or wont produce results.

I don't know how Gary Lam trained, Ernie didn't say. Maybe he trained in kickboxing from the first month. Maybe he was a kickboxer already like Wong Shun Leung who was already a boxer. Maybe if Wong Shun wasn't a boxer then Wing Chun would never have seen the light of day? Maybe how Wong Shun Leung trained is best: first become a boxer, then learn two years of Wing Chun, then go out and challenge fight.

I see many Wing Chun organizations evolving and changing with the times. Now we are able to view all kinds of arts and get a more realistic opinion about what does and doesn't work.

I hope we can all remain civil and respect each other’s opinions and rights.

[YongChun]

Actually our club was always into finding ways to link from the classical Wing Chun training methodology to being able to handle the realistic fighters. We found Chi sau was a very nice step by step approach to close distance fighting other than groundwork. But when it came to distance work fighting against Thais, kickboxers, Preying Mantis whatever it was pure trial and error. All the teachers and most of the tapes only talked about the classical approaches of forms, chi sau and drills. We ordered tape after tape looking for something in the Wing Chun training methodology but there was nothing to be found.

Then I heard WT had good training methods but those were secret. You had to become a member to learn those. Then I heard William cheung's people mostly won in tournaments but there were no tapes to be found. So I ordered William Cheung's tapes but it was the same classical stuff, forms, chi sau and drills.

So then we got Emin Boztepe for a seminar because he was the closest thing to a reality fighter in our mind. But he taught forms, chi sau and drills. So I ordered his tapes, it had forms, chi sau and drills.

Then I saw a fabulous martial artist by the name of Gary Lam. His demo on the net looked very impressive. In the writeup he fought the Thais and won. His people trained for real and none of the wimpy dry land swimming stuff that all the other clubs train. So I ordered his tapes. I didn't see any fights with Thais. I didn't see how to spar. I saw form, chi sau and drills.

Then I saw a tape by Chung Kwok Chow about Wing Chun sparring. I thought, maybe that's the link. So I asked people on the net, what do they think? Silence was the answer.

So we just jumped in and fought. Trial and error. The school of hard knocks. But in the end, we couldn't fight like Emin Boztepe, we couldn't fight like Gary Lam, we couldn't fight like Kenneth Chung and we couldn't fight like Dr. Khoe. We turned into kickboxers with inferior close range skills.

So we keep looking and looking, trying and trying. Hey where's the beef?

[Zhuge Liang]

Hi Ray,

Thanks for all the stories. I always find them fascinating reads.

FWIW, Ken does encourage us to go out and experiment with people of different backgrounds. The catch is, in my experience and understanding, which may be wrong, he doesn't do so until you reach a certain level of acheivement in acquiring and using the "engine" that he teaches.

Regards,
Alan

[YongChun]

Hi Alan.

Thanks. I find that's the key. If you don't have the engine yet then you will just become a kickboxer, regular Karate type of tournament fighter or brawler. I have seen that over and over again. It happened to me in Hung style as well because I was from a Karate background. People always end up going back to Karate if the new art is not ingrained very well.

You end up with the standard, front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, jab, cross, uppercut, hook, clinch, elbow, knee, footsweep, grab the waste or legs for takedown, headlock, roll around on the ground and press your elbow into his throat and your knee into his ribs. Then do that faster and faster with more and more power. Supplement that with a million push ups, situps, weight training running, pounding the bag. So what do you end up with? A good tough fighter but where's the refined Wing Chun?

[Edmund]

Originally posted by YongChun
Hi Alan.

Thanks. I find that's the key. If you don't have the engine yet then you will just become a kickboxer, regular Karate type of tournament fighter or brawler. I have seen that over and over again. It happened to me in Hung style as well because I was from a Karate background. People always end up going back to Karate if the new art is not ingrained very well.

You end up with the standard, front kick, side kick, roundhouse kick, jab, cross, uppercut, hook, clinch, elbow, knee, footsweep, grab the waste or legs for takedown, headlock, roll around on the ground and press your elbow into his throat and your knee into his ribs. Then do that faster and faster with more and more power. Supplement that with a million push ups, situps, weight training running, pounding the bag. So what do you end up with? A good tough fighter but where's the refined Wing Chun?

Where's the refined WC when you suck at all those things?
:rolleyes: That's not even describing a kickboxing training regime so it's a strawman argument.

When WC people enter kickboxing matches, it becomes obvious what their weaknesses are. e.g. They suck at kicking.
If WC has weaknesses then they should be fixed. This applies for everyone not just WC people who want to enter kickboxing.

How do you fix them? You learn from someone good at that weak area. Why would you just go to WC people?

This isn't just training for the ring. WC is weak at certain aspects of fighting. You said yourself that there's nothing special in WC methods for distance fighting.

There is something special in Muay Thai methods: The way they work with a pad holder, the way they do drills, their theories of fighting. And it gets results because they are way more skilled against WC guys at a distance.

[Ernie]

Ray,
Those were great post , and Alan , I don’t think your wrong at all the core engine and *application* of that engine is key for long term growth .
But ray I fear the path you searched for does not exist there is no step by step *classical or non classical* approach for sparring/fighting . it’s not paint by numbers , it’s based on personal experience , each time you are in a session or match you analyze and experiment and study , do your home work on the fly . the training system wing Chun or what ever just prepares you for the experience .

I will not fight like Gary , I will fight like Ernie [ talking about myself in third person is just weird]
I won’t be facing the same person , same punch same kick in the same way he did . I will have to figure it all out on my own , by experiencing it and learning to adapt and apply [ in my case wing chun concept and body mechanics ]

I can shot a video and show you how I intercept some one or what ever but unless you have my attributes you won’t be able to do the same way , it’s all about flight time bro, techniques are secondary , you might have the deadliest most structured most rooted tan sau in the world but if your timing sucks and your distance is wrong and your speed is off then you will not be able to apply it .

You shouldn’t look for the classical way to deal with the modern you should find your way to deal with what ever IMO
This path is much more true to the source .
You can learn from other peoples experience , cut some of the trial and error out of it , training methods that are geared towards results or attribute specific but in the end it’s still up to little old you

[kj]

Originally posted by Ernie
the training system wing Chun or what ever just prepares you for the experience
.
.
.
You can learn from other peoples experience , cut some of the trial and error out of it , training methods that are geared towards results or attribute specific but in the end it’s still up to little old you

This is true in my humbling experience too, Ernie.

The old sayings "the teacher merely points the way" and "it can be harder to find a good student than a good teacher" seem apropos.

Regards,
- kj

[YongChun]

Ok back to Thai boxing 101. Now where did I put that tape? Hey who took my pads? Kick, kick kick. Ok where's those Thai guys?

Ernie, that's what I found as well. However it's nice to have some role models to follow to try their approaches to see if it works for us. The role models now are boxers, Thai boxers, BJJ, Judo, MMA because we can see these guys fight and analyze their methods and try them ourselves. But there are no Wing Chun fights anywhere to be seen. The same is true of Tai Chi, Hung style and many others. Only the fantasy movie stuff around. It's easier to train in Thai boxing because there are training methods and plenty of videos of real fights and many trainers around. The same for boxing, wrestling, Judo, Fencing, BJJ and MMA.

I offered as an example Chung Kwok Chow's sparring approach. I think maybe Augustine Fong had a tape out as well. Those tapes were made before the MMA days but after the Thai massacres. Steve Cotrell covers some of the basics for dealing with kickers and grapplers. So tapes like that are an example of links into the distance world which people can try.

Benny the Jet was pretty good but also had a hard time with the Thais. So as someone said the best is to learn from the actual Thais. That's what I think Gary Lam did.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by YongChun
Ok back to Thai boxing 101. Now where did I put that tape? Hey who took my pads? Kick, kick kick. Ok where's those Thai guys?

If your mission in life is to beat a Thai fighter then , get in front of as many as you can and time your entry , does this mean you need to throw a thigh kick , nope
It helps since you know what it takes and what the other person is looking for , but all you need is timing to enter with that ever tool best suits you , and a whole lot of luck

Now back to my packing
:D

[sihing]

I know most on here don't believe in stories but I have a recent one that may or may not relate to this thread. I just found out recently about a incident one of the students had. This student is 29yrs of age, Male, in okay shape, and has been a student in the school since 1993 or so, but is not a consistent student and has only obtained a level 7 grade out of 10 levels(he knows the first part of the Bil Jee form put it that way). I would have to say he has some natural ability to fight, he's 5'10", 185-190lbs, with average skill in his WC ability mostly due to his inconsistent training habits. The last time he was in a class was back during summer camp last July. Anyways he was engaged in some business down in Chinatown, a arguement insued and the chinese guy called some back up. The student was by himself and ended up having to battle anywhere from 6 to 8 guys, some with knives alone. From what I was told he really had to lay the boots good to some of them but he said himself that he got a bit of a beating too, but he walked away from the situation without having to go to the hospital and is doing fine now(the incident happened last Saturday).

Now is this student a Fighter or Non Fighter?

James

[Edmund]

Originally posted by sihing
The last time he was in a class was back during summer camp last July.

Non Fighter.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by sihing


Now is this student a Fighter or Non Fighter?

James

I have a lot of those stories and they are also true. I believe your story is probably true, it happens. But from the discussions so far he would be classified as a non-fighter because he is part of your approach which was considered to be part of the swimming on dry land school and because a real fighter trains fighting regularly against kickboxers, Thai boxers and BJJ artists as well as regular hard sparring in the club. I think I got that right Terrence?

Hey here are some good links that talk about Kung Fu masters getting beat up by the Thai guys. Some good articles here and there anyway that show the inferiority of Kung Fu but show that SanDa at least can beat up the Japanese Karate fighters.

http://crane.50megs.com/index6r.htm
http://crane.50megs.com/index6d.htm
http://crane.50megs.com/

I found that stuff here: http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32912
where the guy talks about how useless Wing Chun and Choy Lee Fut is for real fighting. But he got Thai boxing to work real good.

Whether we agree or not with whoevers viewpoint, I think every martial artist still has to think about the effectiveness of his or her training methods in the art in light of this information provided. The easy way out is just to say OK, forget KungFu and switch to modern fighting arts instead. Bruce Lee was onto something. Jeet Kune Do probably didn't do the trick as far as matching the Thais go. However his finger pointing the way to look at the training methods of other arts and not to just consider what you are doing as the most superior thing or to think your art will automatically turn you into a fighter was probably the main message.

I was always interested in the training methods of old but when I questioned one Wing Chun master about the training methods Yip Man used he took offense (like I didn't trust his methods I guess). So then I thought in my mind ok, just forget it. Probably there were no good training methods.

[Edmund]

Actually I've seen some San da kickboxing in China on TV.
Some have beaten Thais previously.

I'd say some guys are good at certain areas and crap at others.
Overall the standard isn't quite as high because I saw a lot of brawling.

[Bob8]

Ray wrote: "I was always interested in the training methods of old but when I questioned one Wing Chun master about the training methods Yip Man used he took offense (like I didn't trust his methods I guess). So then I thought in my mind ok, just forget it. Probably there were no good training methods."

I think it highly depends how you ask someone
with a traditional culture. This could be part of the
problem.

[kj]

Originally posted by sihing
Now is this student a Fighter or Non Fighter?

By today's standards he would be a non-fighter. In the bigger picture, something as practical as saving your own skin is trivial, irrelevant, and illustrates no skill. The term fighting nowadays is used to refer to a pursuit, not something born of necessity.

Supplementing one's natural attributes or talents in a way that makes a difference also isn't relevant to skill or fighting anymore, except if it is pursued as something competitive and illustrated in that way.

The Wing Chun stories of old were more impressive because they were so often about someone saving their own skin, and that used to be considered something of value. There are tons of those kinds of stories and there continue to be more of them every day. The bar has been raised though and now it's about competitive fighting; the personal protection aspect is no longer impressive or relevant. We have quotes from famous people that we can use to support that point. Also, since we must be skeptical of stories and their details, they are valueless in this black-and-white, data-driven day and age.

The continuous personal improvement model is even more irrelevant and passe.

Fighting is now only about a) the pursuit of fighting and b) who is the best. Even that only counts for today, as you must do it again tomorrow and the next day for it to bear any meaning. By today's standards it is about the identity of "being" a fighter rather than preparing in case of one.

Regards,
- kj

[CFT]

I've got to applaud Ray for his openness and honesty. He has really set out in detail how he trains (and trained), why he trains the way he does, his goals and those of some of his students.

That's why so many people find it easy to attack him, because of this openness, when there really isn't much to attack. He doesn't disagree about the need to fight only when to do so in his model of progression. Does it really matter when this transition takes place? Only if you're in a hurry to get into some kind of competitive arena.

He is not selling his students any kind of unrealistic dogma. He's not saying anything that puts his students in danger, AFAIK.

There are some disagreements all around as to what "quality" means. Some think only in terms of results and others in terms of displaying the qualities of the system they train in when they are fighting. Possibly no one can agree on this.

I think it is quite important to note that when Ray says he doesn't want his Wing Chun to look like kickboxing when he or his students fight, he is not saying anything bad about kickboxing. My interpretation of this is that Wing Chun that looks like kickboxing will be bad kickboxing. All the mechanics are wrong for it. Whereas good kickboxing is undeniably effective. But I don't want to put words into Ray's mouth; just tell me to shut up Ray.

I think Ray should be commended for maintaining Wing Chun practice in his part of the country. He seems to have tried his best for both his students and himself. I don't think there is anything wrong with his goal (one of many I'm sure) of fighting in a manner that is obviously Wing Chun (preferably "good" WCK).

[KingMonkey]

The student was by himself and ended up having to battle anywhere from 6 to 8 guys, some with knives alone.
Your student should get himself a cape and re-invent himself as a superhero.
6-8 guys with knives and he walks away without a scratch ?

Either a lot of exaggeration has crept into this story or these guys werent seriously interested in cutting him. I train with knives regularly and empty hands vs multiple knives you got pretty much no chance and I dont care who you are.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Your student should get himself a cape and re-invent himself as a superhero.
6-8 guys with knives and he walks away without a scratch ?"
(KM)

Amen to that. Can we return back to earth now?

[CFT]

Originally posted by KingMonkey
Your student should get himself a cape and re-invent himself as a superhero.
6-8 guys with knives and he walks away without a scratch ?KingMonkey,

Though the events seem incredible, if you read the post carefully you will find that the student does indeed get injured - just not seriously enough to require hospital treatment.


From what I was told he really had to lay the boots good to some of them but he said himself that he got a bit of a beating too, but he walked away from the situation without having to go to the hospital and is doing fine now(the incident happened last Saturday).

[KingMonkey]

Chee, you may have interpreted "without a scratch" less literally than I had intended.

Cheers

[CFT]

Originally posted by KingMonkey
Chee, you may have interpreted "without a scratch" less literally than I had intended.Errr, sorry?

[YongChun]

Originally posted by KingMonkey
Your student should get himself a cape and re-invent himself as a superhero.
6-8 guys with knives and he walks away without a scratch ?

Either a lot of exaggeration has crept into this story or these guys werent seriously interested in cutting him. I train with knives regularly and empty hands vs multiple knives you got pretty much no chance and I dont care who you are.

Every expert will agree you have very little chance. It has been proven over and over again when martial artists get red markers and color each other red.

Actually Wong Shun Leung told me the same kind of story when he visited here with Tsui Shan Ting. He said there were even more people, also armed with knives. He had to save his friend he said and did. In the process he did get cut and showed us the scars where he got sliced. He told us that story when we were discussing knife defense. He said he didn't like to teach that because even if his techniques would work 80% of the time the other 20% would get you killed. He didn't want to put his students at risk by giving them a false sense of confidence. I’m not sure if Wong Shun Leung had on his protective cape but that might very well have been the case.

I don't think Wong Shun Leung made up that story either but it’s possible he did for marketing reasons. Wong shun Leung didn’t claim he could do it again or that he could even handle a single less skillful guy than him with a knife. By a combination of luck and some skill these guys happened to have survived. Sometimes that happens in real life but mostly you get killed off.

Emin Boztepe also told us he survived some knife incidents but also doesn't claim he can do that anytime. Again it was a combination of luck (#1 ingredient) and some skill (#2 ingredient).

Kenneth Chung also told us that knife defense is unrealistic and so didn’t want to touch that subject. He was in favor of the standard police tactics of going one level up. If you got a knife then I got a gun.

Some people claim that training knife defense is useless and some claim it's better than nothing. Definitely it's hard to check for real if your trained skills will work. In the empty hand world it's also difficult to judge if your skills will handle a real Thai boxer on a consistent basis unless you really try. However people with half a brain and the capability to do some research can probably figure out that their training won't do the job. That's why we have a brain, to avoid painful experiences like that.

It seems the SanDa people are the closest to matching some of the Thais so far so maybe in the future they can consistently do so. Still they seem like they are in catch up mode and are maybe relying on the wrong Kung Fu model for their inspiration. On the other side maybe they are just redefining the future of what Kung Fu means, which should mean skill in fighting.

It's a natural human tendency to discount stories from other people's lineages, from other arts but believe those that are in your own family.

Judging from a lot of photos, many Chinese were extremely under nourished. I would think that anyone who somehow managed to get enough food (Maybe those in government) and put on a bit of muscle could have beaten thousands of people easily and given the credit to his art. So it's not easy to make anything of any story from the past. even first hand witness testimony cannot be trusted as we all know from court proceedings. They always say trust half of what you see and non of what you hear. In that light some people take all reports experiences with a grain of salt. Some people just stop learning anything at all, sit on their porch, drink a beer, live happily ever after and watch the circus world go by.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun


Who has Yip Man every fought? Who has the founder of Aikido ever fought that we have heard of? And that is why many people believe that the arts passed on my these "masters" are lacking. Because it is doubtful that they actually ever used their stuff against skilled opponents.



Originally posted by YongChun
I read that Nadi was the world’s best fencer however who has he ever fought that I heard of? Fencers have verifiable competition records.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun
Wing Chun who are good, don’t all fall on their faces. Gary Lam is an example of someone who doesn’t.

I believe Gary Lam is good because I saw his videos and trust that Ernie knows what he is talking about. You don’t need to add things because Wing Chun is good enough. I've never met Gary, and maybe Ernie can chime in here, but I'd be willing to bet that he is far from a classical wing chun guy. I'll bet that when he fights, he also incorporates many things he has learned from boxing and Muay Thai. Not to mention the fact that the reason he didn't "fall on his face" was because he actually went out and fought.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YongChun
In my Hung style there were no fancy movements. It was the art the underground used to kill each other. Is this verifiable, or are these just stories you have "heard"?

[KingMonkey]

Some people claim that training knife defense is useless and some claim it's better than nothing. Ray, I think, as some of the names you mention allude to that it can be worse than nothing if handled badly.

The most important thing is a healthy fear of and respect for the deadly life ending and fight ending properties of a knife even in the hands of a chump let alone someone who knows the basics of moving their feet and the weapon.

Frequent demos at seminars with supposedly high level martial artists who train only knife defense as opposed to knife attack show that a lot of people just dont get this.

I would never teach someone who hadnt knife sparred any sort of knife defense and I feel very strongly that it's wrong to do so.

[sihing]

Yes I agree you definetly have to have a healthy respect for the knife, and if possible run when one is going to be used against you, but unless you are totally naked when in this situation then there are other avenues, use anything on your person to help(belts, clothing, shoes, etc.) you defend against the knife, make them commit to the attack, distract them(spitting, yelling) and control if possible the knife hand.

Victor,
So if my story of the students recent incident is phoney baloney then I guess your Teachers GM Cheungs's story is too? He had a confrontation with multiple opponents too some with knives and clubs back when he travelled from HK to Austrailia, correct? You believe one person but not another because you do not trust the source, ME? LOL.

James

[t_niehoff]

Anecdotal stories don't matter -- I know a young woman with absolutely no training, that fought off a knife-weilding home-invader and didn't get a scratch. So what? Does that mean she is a good fighter? What about folks that have beaten off bear attacks?

We can find anecdotes to support any position ("my grandfather smoked his whole life and never got cancer"). Skill, however, is repeatable on demand -- that's what separates it from luck, happenstance, etc.

Terence

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
I've never met Gary, and maybe Ernie can chime in here, but I'd be willing to bet that he is far from a classical wing chun guy. I'll bet that when he fights, he also incorporates many things he has learned from boxing and Muay Thai. Not to mention the fact that the reason he didn't "fall on his face" was because he actually went out and fought.

I was going to say that too but didn't have time yet.

Ray

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Is this verifiable, or are these just stories you have "heard"?

Your right, none of the Kung Fu stories can really be verified. All of us slip up occasionally to believe some of these fantasy stories. I have no idea why all those Kung Fu styles exist really including Wing Chun. None have ever been proven in a modern ring environment.

Even Terrence mentioned an uncredible story about someone in his lineage being a good fighter.

The only thing we can judge for sure is if someone competes for real in a series of matches against the Thais or against the Brazillians and we can see it on a tape. For the beginners, the guy on the floor didn't win.

In the 70's I met a Yip Man student who wanted to train a native to fight against the Thais. He heard the natives were very good fighters and so he thought he could train one to fight the Thais but he never found a suitable candidate to train. In the 80's I heard of one win by a Wing Chun guy (maybe just another wild story by Wang Kiu) but the guy got his leg splintered to pieces.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I was going to say that too but didn't have time yet."

Ray


Let me see if I've got this right...Ray...You also believe that Gary's success was due in part to the fact that he incorporated many things he learned from boxing and Muay Thai...

or are you saying that you too believe that the reason why he didn't fall on his face was because he actually went out and fought?

Or are you saying that you agree with both statements?

[PaulH]

While I train at Gary's place, we are often entertained with several colorful adventurous accounts of Wong, Gary, and other WSL students against several KF styles in HK days. So I gather from those that Gary is more into knowing the games of other styles, and figure out smart WC ways of how to beat it. His fighting philosophy and strategy are more WC oriented. =)

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Your right, none of the Kung Fu stories can really be verified. All of us slip up occasionally to believe some of these fantasy stories. I have no idea why all those Kung Fu styles exist really including Wing Chun. None have ever been proven in a modern ring environment.

**No one in BJJ or boxing or muay thai or wrestling or any active fighting method gives a rat's @ss about what some long dead ancestor could reportedly do -- they care about what they themselves can do. And they can see top-notch folks actually using their respective methods to fight. When someone has the skill, they will have no problem demonstrating that they do. But when we have "stories" and no validation or proof, it pretty much tells you that the story was all puff.

Even Terrence mentioned an uncredible story about someone in his lineage being a good fighter.

**Hey, I make no claims about anyone.

The only thing we can judge for sure is if someone competes for real in a series of matches against the Thais or against the Brazillians and we can see it on a tape. For the beginners, the guy on the floor didn't win.

**Ray, tell me how you can measure WCK skill, the ability to fight with the WCK method, if you don't fight? How can someone claim to be good at WCK if they can't "hang" with other good fighters? If performance isn't the standard, please tell me what you would use.

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"I was going to say that too but didn't have time yet."
Ray
Let me see if I've got this right...Ray...You also believe that Gary's success was due in part to the fact that he incorporated many things he learned from boxing and Muay Thai...

or are you saying that you too believe that the reason why he didn't fall on his face was because he actually went out and fought?

Or are you saying that you agree with both statements?

I think he learned a lot of things from boxing and Muay Thai which makes his Wing Chun very effective. If nothing else it's the confidence he gained from doing those arts and also the sense of distance and timing he developed there. Those kinds of skills can transfer over to Wing Chun as can the good conditioning work. Because of this good background, he didn't fall on his face.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"If nothing else it's the confidence he gained from doing those arts and also the sense of distance and timing he developed there."
(Ray)

Agreed.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff


**Ray, tell me how you can measure WCK skill, the ability to fight with the WCK method, if you don't fight? How can someone claim to be good at WCK if they can't "hang" with other good fighters? If performance isn't the standard, please tell me what you would use.

Regards,

Terence


I can just speak for the sports side of Wing Chun. In Canada we have the open to all arts Tan sau competition as part of our yearly September beaver ball festival in Quebec. This year the event had to be postponed and moved to another city because of the severe snowstorms that left millions of people homeless and without power. A panel of six distinguished judges determined the winner after watching three full rounds. This year it was an honor to have Bill Thompson the new Canadian Prime Minister as head judge. Bill Thompson was actually a competitor in years past.

The rules are very simple; whoever has the best Tan sau wins. Protective equipment is a must to avoid injuries. What frequently happens is that competitors get nervous, slip and fall and hurt themselves. This is because of the icy floor conditions. Some people may think this kind of event is a joke but these individuals just don’t understand. Until you feel what a real Tan sau is like, feel the energy, the precision of the position and the overall display of balance and poise, you cannot even begin to understand the subtleties of the event. As you may well know, the government no longer funds hockey. In light of this, more and more people are switching to watching this. Last year more than 1200 people or half the population of Quebec, watched the event.

In all these years no one has ever matched the record of Canuck the Great who defeated more than 50 competitors in a row while blindfolded. As everyone knows Canuck the Great was famous for his fight with one of the white Grizzly bears that we have up here. These Grizzly bears are notorious for the damage they cause to all the igloos here. The government has issued a warning about hanging the fish outside to dry. Apparently that attracts the bears. In one fight he shoved the barrel of his gun down the bears throat and finished it off with a hatchet to the head. There is even a brass statue of him doing that on Parliament hill. Also in his honor we now have renamed our international full contact Lacrosse team to the Ottawa Canucks.

Canuck the great is also known for his great showmanship abilities. This year to raise money to repair the submarines in the great Canadian navy he demonstrated his unusual skills of being able to stand on a dozen eggs. Apparently no Canadian has ever done that before. The previous record was held my Lester B. Pearson who managed to stand on a half dozen eggs.

There has been talk of having light contact Chi sau competition. Canadian officials have received a 200 million dollar grant to promote the sport as a possible way to curb the obesity that is now rampant in all the Canadian schools. As a way to raise more money for this event specially stamped chocolate bars with the Canadian flag’s blue, white and red stripes and 9 stars to represent the provinces, will be issued to all school lunch programs. The free lunch program has recently undergone some massive cuts so that’s a very welcome initiative.

The organizers for this event hope that Beijing will entertain the thought of including this new sport in the 2010 Olympics along with the demonstration sport of Chinese Wu Shu. Scientists, who have been given a 50 million dollar grant to study the safety issues, think that maybe 16-ounce gloves, Lacrosse Shin pads and special high impact hockey helmets may do the trick.

[old jong]

Ray!
Just to keep you well informed; we decide to grow bigger in Quebec this year.The "beaver ball" festival will give place to the new and improved "Moose ball" festival.
Thanks.

[sihing]

Just to make it official Ray has lost it!. LOL, Good story Ray, you had me going for the first paragraph....

[Tydive]

a possible way to curb the obesity that is now rampant in all the Canadian schools. As a way to raise more money for this event specially stamped chocolate bars

Fighting obesity with chocolate bars... Now that is funny.

[anerlich]

I like the "chocolate bars against obesity" campaign too.


Scientists, who have been given a 50 million dollar grant to study the safety issues, think that maybe 16-ounce gloves, Lacrosse Shin pads and special high impact hockey helmets may do the trick.

I was told on another thread my sicientific credentials suck, but I'd recommend using those Sumo suits as well.

Nice one Ray. BTW, in Star Wars 7, there is a tan sao vs light sabre duel.

[Vajramusti]

Andrew sez:
I like the "chocolate bars against obesity" campaign too.

((My secret weapon no less- visions of Lady Godiva)



I was told on another thread my sicientific credentials suck,

((Not to worry.Priestly pronouncements have little to do with science))

Nice one Ray.

((Absolutely))
__________________

[Edmund]

Originally posted by CFT

I think it is quite important to note that when Ray says he doesn't want his Wing Chun to look like kickboxing when he or his students fight, he is not saying anything bad about kickboxing. My interpretation of this is that Wing Chun that looks like kickboxing will be bad kickboxing. All the mechanics are wrong for it. Whereas good kickboxing is undeniably effective.


Then beat kickboxing with the "right" mechanics.

Guys have been trying to already. WC people have been fighting in kickboxing for quite some time now. In HK. Here in Australia. Probably other places to. I hear 3 WSL guys fought in Japan maybe a couple of years ago and each got KOed 1st round. My guys haven't lost with the Wing Chun that looks like bad kickboxing. :P

Some of the mechanics that WC people hold so dear just doesn't work so right in a fight I believe. I'm willing to be proven wrong.
But when I hear various excuses about the rules or not preparing the right way or the other guy being too tough, it really just avoids the issue.

Frankly if you can't make it past the 1st round, a little constructive criticism should be welcomed.

[Vajramusti]

Edmund sez:

Then beat kickboxing with the "right" mechanics.

((Preachy?))

Guys have been trying to already. WC people have been fighting in kickboxing for quite some time now. In HK. Here in Australia. Probably other places to.

((How do you know -not elsewhere? Or are you limitinf it to their turf?))


Some of the mechanics that WC people hold so dear just doesn't work so right in a fight I believe.

((Depends on what you mean.One needs both the right engine and the driver))

I'm willing to be proven wrong.

((Why does anyone have to prove it to to you? This is just a chit chat list))


But when I hear various excuses about the rules or not preparing the right way or the other guy being too tough, it really just avoids the issue.

((What's the issue?))

Frankly if you can't make it past the 1st round, a little constructive criticism should be welcomed

((In a real fight there is no second round))

[Vajramusti]

Edmund sez:

Then beat kickboxing with the "right" mechanics.

((Preachy?))

Guys have been trying to already. WC people have been fighting in kickboxing for quite some time now. In HK. Here in Australia. Probably other places to.

((How do you know -not elsewhere? Or are you limitinf it to their turf?))


Some of the mechanics that WC people hold so dear just doesn't work so right in a fight I believe.

((Depends on what you mean.One needs both the right engine and the driver))

I'm willing to be proven wrong.

((Why does anyone have to prove it to to you? This is just a chit chat list))


But when I hear various excuses about the rules or not preparing the right way or the other guy being too tough, it really just avoids the issue.

((What's the issue?))

Frankly if you can't make it past the 1st round, a little constructive criticism should be welcomed

[Edmund]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
Edmund sez:

Then beat kickboxing with the "right" mechanics.

((Preachy?))


I call it Chatty.



Guys have been trying to already. WC people have been fighting in kickboxing for quite some time now. In HK. Here in Australia. Probably other places to.

((How do you know -not elsewhere? Or are you limitinf it to their turf?))



Not sure what you mean. I said Kickboxing probably in other places too.




Some of the mechanics that WC people hold so dear just doesn't work so right in a fight I believe.

((Depends on what you mean.One needs both the right engine and the driver))

I'm willing to be proven wrong.

((Why does anyone have to prove it to to you? This is just a chit chat list))



I'm just stating how open minded I am to the possibility that I am wrong. It's not a request directed towards anyone. Let's not just pick on the word "prove"...:rolleyes:

Like Ray was saying he would like the classical Wing Chun training methodology to be able to handle the realistic fighters.
I'm curious too. I'd like to see if it's possible.




But when I hear various excuses about the rules or not preparing the right way or the other guy being too tough, it really just avoids the issue.

((What's the issue?))


Whether they had the "right engine"!
If any problems are always blamed on the driver, then the "engine" is going to have a hard time finding any more drivers eventually.

The poor driver is just doing what he's taught.




Frankly if you can't make it past the 1st round, a little constructive criticism should be welcomed

((In a real fight there is no second round))

They didn't last long enough to even make it that far so that's not a particularly relevant fact.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Ray, tell me how you can measure WCK skill, the ability to fight with the WCK method, if you don't fight? How can someone claim to be good at WCK if they can't "hang" with other good fighters? If performance isn't the standard, please tell me what you would use."
(Terence)

Although Ray's answer to this was hilarious (the tan sau competition)...

he has avoided Terence's question...and his point.

In the final analysis - performance has to be the standard. (fighting/sparring/contact tournaments).

Without some or all of the above - there is no objective evidence that one's wing chun training has been effective. Just hearsay and conjecture.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"Ray, tell me how you can measure WCK skill, the ability to fight with the WCK method, if you don't fight? How can someone claim to be good at WCK if they can't "hang" with other good fighters? If performance isn't the standard, please tell me what you would use."
(Terence)

Although Ray's answer to this was hilarious (the tan sau competition)...

he has avoided Terence's question...and his point.

In the final analysis - performance has to be the standard. (fighting/sparring/contact tournaments).

Without some or all of the above - there is no objective evidence that one's wing chun training has been effective. Just hearsay and conjecture.

I avoided the answer because I already gave the answer a long time ago. My model for someone with no fighting background, scared to fight, not in shape, clueless is as follows:

1. Get their body into shape.
2. Teach them the SLT form
3. Teach them Chi sau
4. Do some drills
5. Teach them CK
6. Teach some distance drills
7. Teach a bit of the dummy
8. Incorporate that into the distance drills
9. Train mixed chi sau
10. Train mixed light fighting
Now they feel a little comfortable with fighting.
All along tell them the idea of the whole program, show them videos of fighters of all types.
11. Get some experts in to teach about Thai boxing, grappling, weapons work to expose them to more things.
12. Get some protective equipment and spar a bit, gradually inccreasing the intensity and speed until they are comfortable at each level of intensity.
13. Add in anything from any style into the mix.
14. Now the student can keep doing this, or try competition or just fight harder and harder with people from other styles or diversify.
15. I recommend for the student to go and try something else and if they still want to do Wing Chun later then they are welcome. So some students do that. Some try Escrima, some try mixed martial arts, some try Tai Chi, some try BJJ. The student learns to trust himself and not just listen to me.
16. Some students just stick around, some go and come back, some go and never come back.
17. Many students get married, have jobs, start a family so they either disappear or they come once a week for maintenance mode.

A normal 1 hour class consists of (after the student has a bit of Wing Chun). With longer classes do more of everything.

1. At least the SLT form, 5 minutes (they can do the longer stuff at home)
2. CK and all the other forms just for a warm up.
3. Chi sau: single sticking hands, Lap sau, Rolling hands
4. Various Chi sau drills, or attack and defence or mixed chi sau depending on what the students want to work on and also depends on what they need and who their partner is. Evryone tries to help everyone. Just working on developing a good stance, later a mobile stance, being relaxed, keeping good angles and postures, having crisp sharp and controlled attacks. This takes half the time. Heavy emphasis on stance, position, relaxation and sensitivity.

Have a few minutes break to switch modes from close to far.

5. Hit and kick the bags, pads, in all kinds of ways, moving or not moving to try to develop explosive hits, heavy hits, fast hits, combination his whatever depending on where the student is at.
6. Train distance fighting techniques. How to close against hitters and grappler.
7. Put on some protection and mix it up, either in attack and defense or both trying anythingat the same time. Sometimes train against the shoot, sometimes against hooks and jabs. The intensity depends on the students level. enough to challenge them but not enough to feak them out and turn them off martial arts or to injure them.
8. Work on the dummy.
9. Every once in awhile go very fast and see if the student can relax under pressure.
10. Video some of the fighting occasionally to more clearly see mistakes and in general to see how crappy everyone looks.

Every once in awhile do knife sparring, fool around with other arts, work on the pole or Butterfly knife or whatever.

The time frame to get the student into fighting mode varies very much with the ability of the student, their interest, their age, their physical limitations, their intelligence level, the amount of time they practice, and a host of other factors. Some people fight in 6 months, some in five years and some never.

We don't have any fixed time frame and we don't use too many standard drills. We go random pretty fast but the results aren't as good that way. I have discarded many drills over the years until we have next to none.

We constantly think about all this stuff, try different ways, and learn from the experience of others.

Some students have been bouncers, police officers or correctional officers. Many students had other martial arts before from beginners to advanced levels. They report to me what they found worked or didn't work. I post some of that information on the net. I'm told it is BS and all stories are lies. But that's fine, it's only a chat group.

The real fighters to me are those fighting for a cause, fighting for injustice, fighting for their life when they have Cancer, fighting to support their family, fighting oppression or taking on a wild animal to save a little girl. Fighting to pound someone's head in to get a thrill or get me to a high doesn't interest me. But competitive people need that. I don't look down upon them, it's just a different genetic makeup. I don't look down upon the handicapped and those less abled, I try to help them when I can. None of us are the same. I respect everyone's ideas. We all travel along our own paths and are into the art for different reasons.

I have been in modes where I trained Wing Chun seven days a week but that is definitely bad if you expect to have a family life.

After having seen a few close people suffer from Cancer, bravely fight the pain and die, I don't view the fight for glory as anything important for me. These people provided a model for me of a true fighter. My goal in life is to help who I can and to see my family grow.

The answer: sports skill can be measured if there is a known standard. Fighting a skilled person in many matches can tell you where you are at. But some people just don't feel the need to prove themselves over and over again.

I think a lot depends on what teachers happen to be available in your area. You try to find the best ones. After a certain age, you care less about yourself but just try to point the student in the right direction. In the near future I will try to get a Thai boxing teacher and a submission wrestler to teach my guys something.

[Nick Forrer]

Originally posted by Edmund
Then beat kickboxing with the "right" mechanics.

Seen it done. I've walked through my cousin (10+ years kickboxing on and off), I've seen my teacher walk through one of his students (a very good kick boxer), My training partner walked through a thai boxer etc.

Of course skill levels vary between individuals, but then that is equally true of WC, a fact which your blanket generalisations about WC seem to skip over.



Originally posted by Edmund
I hear 3 WSL guys fought in Japan maybe a couple of years ago and each got KOed 1st round.

Which guys? Names? Teacher?

[Frank Exchange]

WRT an earlier post about Aldo Nadi, a more than accomplished competition fencer, and how he stepped off the salle to fight in serveral real duels.

Onlookers at the time were extremely surprised to see the champion displaying little or none of his famous skill once there was a chance of serious injury.

He was nervous, shaky, hesitant, leaning well forward, and his style was totally unlike that he would have used in competition. In short, his sport skills were not particularly applicable to the real duel. He was very very aware of the difference.

Having said that, would I rather face him or someone else in a real duel? ;) However, the point is that sport skills, even at a high level, do not automatically or necessarily transfer across.

For what its worth.

Taken from "The Secret History Of The Sword", I will try to find the reference if anyone is interested.

[kj]

Ray, thank you for sharing your sincere, balanced and mature perspective.


Originally posted by YongChun
The real fighters to me are those fighting for a cause, fighting for injustice, fighting for their life when they have Cancer, fighting to support their family, fighting oppression or taking on a wild animal to save a little girl. Fighting to pound someone's head in to get a thrill or get me to a high doesn't interest me. But competitive people need that. I don't look down upon them, it's just a different genetic makeup. I don't look down upon the handicapped and those less abled, I try to help them when I can. None of us are the same. I respect everyone's ideas. We all travel along our own paths and are into the art for different reasons.
.
.
.
After having seen a few close people suffer from Cancer, bravely fight the pain and die, I don't view the fight for glory as anything important for me. These people provided a model for me of a true fighter. My goal in life is to help who I can and to see my family grow.


Amen.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Frank Exchange
However, the point is that sport skills, even at a high level, do not automatically or necessarily transfer across. Frank X,

That's a very Interesting piece of informantion. It really illustrates how physical skill can be compromised by the psyche.

Thanks,

[t_niehoff]

Frank Exchange wrote:

WRT an earlier post about Aldo Nadi, a more than accomplished competition fencer, and how he stepped off the salle to fight in serveral real duels.

Onlookers at the time were extremely surprised to see the champion displaying little or none of his famous skill once there was a chance of serious injury.

He was nervous, shaky, hesitant, leaning well forward, and his style was totally unlike that he would have used in competition. In short, his sport skills were not particularly applicable to the real duel. He was very very aware of the difference.

Having said that, would I rather face him or someone else in a real duel? However, the point is that sport skills, even at a high level, do not automatically or necessarily transfer across.

For what its worth.

Taken from "The Secret History Of The Sword", I will try to find the reference if anyone is interested.

**Good, thoughtful post (and a good suggested read, btw). One thing that nonfighters often point out in defense of their "training program" is that sport or challenge fighting or fighting as part of one's training isn't "real fighting" (an assault on the 'street"). And this account of course illustrates that. What's interesting, however, is that no one that does sport or challenge fighting or fighting as part of their training would say that it was; Nadi wouldn't say competitive fencing is the same as fighting a duel. But the question remains of how do we obtain and increase our **base fighting skills** (which should serve us regardless of the venue) to best prepare us to fight, even on the street? The only possible answer is to develop those base skills by fighting, at at as high an intensity level as possible (you don't need to always train there, but regularly).

**Intensity is one of the major characteristics of fighting, and relates to the level of the opponent's attributes, the level of the opponent's skill, and the level of risk involved. IOWs, the greater the risk, the greater the intensity (walking a tightrope from 1 meter off the ground isn't intense; walking the same tightrope 100 meters off the ground is very intense -- the latter is a much greater challenge but all that changed was the level of risk). Obviously we can't in our training have levels of risk that involve death or serious physical injury; we can't train at that level of intensity. So the best that we can do is train at a level of intensity as high as we possibly can (full attributes, against highly skilled opponents, with some acceptable risks of injury) to become accustomed to dealing with that environment.

**So, sure Nadi had problems dealing with the greater level of intensity -- but just imagine the trouble he would have had if he didn't have the skills at the level (including intensity level) he obtained by competitive fencing. Suppose he never bouted but only took "lessons" and did drills -- he would have had nothing. Instead, he won his duels; he was better prepared than his competition -- his training served him.

Regards,

Terence

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

I avoided the answer because I already gave the answer a long time ago.

**You still haven't answered my question: how can you measure progress except through performance?

My model for someone with no fighting background, scared to fight, not in shape, clueless is as follows:

**You gave your "training model" but that doesn't touch on how you measure progress -- a training "progression" doesn't mean one's performance fighting skills are increased. For example, your first point is to get the person in shape. How do you measure the whether they are in shape for WCK fighting, know what areas need work, judge the progress of their training, etc. except through fighting? The "attributes" we use in fighting are activity specific. I've seen guys that run 40 minutes a day gas in five minutes doing BJJ. They have good general cardio but not cardio for rolling.


The real fighters to me are those fighting for a cause, fighting for injustice, fighting for their life when they have Cancer, fighting to support their family, fighting oppression or taking on a wild animal to save a little girl. Fighting to pound someone's head in to get a thrill or get me to a high doesn't interest me. But competitive people need that. I don't look down upon them, it's just a different genetic makeup. I don't look down upon the handicapped and those less abled, I try to help them when I can. None of us are the same. I respect everyone's ideas. We all travel along our own paths and are into the art for different reasons.

**Let's not drag dealing with life's problems into training discussions. Of course there are genuine life challenges that face us all -- but that doesn't tell us anything about how to be a better boxer. And I think it disingenuous to suggest that folks interested in being good boxers, and discussing what training is necessary to be a good boxer, have a different "genetic makeup" or look down on people. It is a simple matter: if someone wants to increase their fighting performance skill level through any martial art, including WCK, they need to do certain things. The upward spiral of step 1 - learn form/technique, step 2 - drill it, step 3 - fight with it, with each step continually informing the others. Every active marital artist, every fighter that has significantly increased their performance, does that in some way.

**I don't "look down" on the handicapped or less able, but I recognize that they won't be able to do everything that those that aren't handicapped or are more able will. Folks in wheelchairs, 90 year old grandmothers, etc. won't be able to box. That's life. Deal with it. And we can respect everyone's ideas, but that doesn't mean they have validity. Someone may think the world is flat, OK - fine with me if they want to believe it and promote it, but they are just plain wrong. Don't be surprised when someone points that out.

I have been in modes where I trained Wing Chun seven days a week but that is definitely bad if you expect to have a family life.

**You keep coming back to this idea that to increase one's fighting performance they need to train like world-class athletes. They don't. A lot of boxers, BJJists, muay thai practitioners, etc. only train a couple of days a week. But they train properly -- by including fighting as part of their training. Hence they improve. It's easy to measure whether we are increasing our performance.


The answer: sports skill can be measured if there is a known standard. Fighting a skilled person in many matches can tell you where you are at. But some people just don't feel the need to prove themselves over and over again.

**You suggest in some of your posts that you train to fight but do it in a more "slow" approach. The statement above, however, belies that for me. Folks that include fighting as part of their training wouldn't say what you say -- they would not have that perspective. It's not a matter of "proving themselves over and over again"; if you fought as part of your training, you'd know that. That's nonfighter-speak. Just like someone saying "you don't need to keeo getting in the pool to prove yourself" is nonswimmer-speak. Swimmers don't think like that. BJJers don't roll and continue to roll to "prove themselves again and again" but to increase and maintain their skill. Same with boxers or any fighter. A fighter would know that.

Regards,

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

More than anything else, there just seems to be a difference of degree between Terence's and Ray's approach - in terms of timing and emphasis. Terence prefers the time period that students begin sparring to be quicker than Ray prefers - and Terence seems to be saying that the frequency of the sparring/fighting should be more regular than what Ray seems to believe. As to intensity - that's going to depend on the students. I personally prefer to err on the side of caution myself.

All out intensity, imo, should be limited to advanced students only - with plenty of protective gear - and with no hesitation to stop the action when it starts to hit the danger zone...and then restart.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
YongChun wrote:

I avoided the answer because I already gave the answer a long time ago.

**You still haven't answered my question: how can you measure progress except through performance?


Regards,

Terence

After my training model, as I have stated before, you can fight with boxers, BJJ and anyone all day long to find out if you can fight. You can fight on the street, fight at home and fight in a war. Seeing if you can fight is easy. You can discard all the training model, all forms, all chi sau and then just fight, fight, fight. That was in fact my Hung style teacher's model.

If I have a baby I have to wait until he crawls, and then when he walks before he can start to learn to fight. Some students are like babies. Maybe where you are you can start babies off with BJJ before they can walk.

[kj]

Terence, Though you haven't offered anything new, your reponse to Ray was nicely written.

Here are the major and consistent shortcomings I see in your arguments (referring to your argument in the general sense, not any single post):

a) Failure to unequivocally define what constitutes "fighting" or a "fight" (and how that differs from all other "performance" based activities including those that others might call sparring or hard chi sau)

b) Non-validated assumptions of what others do in practice

c) A personal but non-universal premise that WCK equals fighting (I being among those who do not accept this premise, though it's interesting fodder for discussion)

d) Over reliance on implicit ad hominem commentary (e.g., "if you fought as part of your training, you'd know that.")

e) Putting a creative spin on what others have said that wasn't what they said

f) Failure to consider ethics, morality, or larger life context (e.g., "Let's not drag dealing with life's problems into training discussions.") Even a logically valid argument isn't robust until the full picture is taken into account, and where human beings are concerned ethics is never irrelevant.

It also seems that over-reliance on certain models has become somewhat of a liability rather than a help to your arguments. Models can be wonderfully effective illustrative tools. However, they are not conclusive devices. For one thing, they can also be applied in different ways to support different POV's; this has already been demonstrated with the swimming analogy numerous times, and the same can done with the fencing analogy. Additionally, "All models are wrong" (George Box) in that except when a model of a thing is the very thing itself, then at some point use of the model or analogy will break down.

I’m hardly a logician, but that's what it looks like from the peanut gallery anyway. Despite these shortcomings, I often find your assertions interesting and thought provoking. There may be some issues I've missed, but I think addressing these areas would greatly strengthen your argument and conclusion.

Regards,
- kj

[Ultimatewingchun]

"After my training model, as I have stated before, you can fight with boxers, BJJ and anyone all day long to find out if you can fight. You can fight on the street, fight at home and fight in a war. Seeing if you can fight is easy. You can discard all the training model, all forms, all chi sau and then just fight, fight, fight. That was in fact my Hung style teacher's model."

Your Hung style teacher's model turn you off to sparring/fighting?

If so - why continue to let his excesses influence you - and I think it has continued - because if you go back and reread the above quote without the final sentence...it suggests someone who is clearly dissing the role of sparring/fighting.

[Vajramusti]

Comments on Edmund's post:

Like Ray was saying he would like the classical Wing Chun training methodology to be able to handle the realistic fighters.
I'm curious too. I'd like to see if it's possible.

(( I do think that folks trained properly in wing chun can take care of themselves. I have seen it done, know people who have done
the same and done it myself. But if you fighta good boxer on his terms in the boxing ring-good chance of losing. If you fighta Thai boxer on his terms- the same. Nothing wrong in gaining some experience in playing their game though.
The story on Nadi's(sp?) sporting skills v dueling skills is isntructive. Big difference between pistol/taget shooting matches and combat shooting.
No sarcasm intended.))

[YongChun]

Ok, I changed my fighting program to match the recommendations on this forum.

L: Lady who wants to learn fighting.
T: Instructor of the Terence school.

L:Hello I’m interested to learn some self defense. Do you teach that?

T:No, Ma’am we fight.

L: My brother who’s in the army recommended your school to me. He knows about fighting.

T: Sorry to burst you bubble Ma’am, he knows nothing about fighting. He trains, he doesn’t fight.

L: Well he fought in the Vietnam war.

T: Get off the pot lady, that’s not fighting, that’s war. See the difference Ma’am.

L: Well I guess…

T: We don’t guess Ma’am we fight. Guessing is for wimps.

L: Now I’m confused.

T: That’s ok Ma’am. Most people are confused. The sooner you learn to fight the less confused you’ll be.

L: So can you explain the program? I heard you learn some forms and some drills to start.

T: No Ma’am, you heard wrong. Forms and drills are what non-fighters do. We fight Ma’am. If you want to do forms and drills join the local Ballet school down the street.

L: Which Ballet school do you mean?

T: The Kung Fu school, the Karate school whatever. It’s all Ballet to me.

L: Boy, you really know about fighting.

T: Yes, Ma’am, that’s what we do.

L: So how do I start?

T: You start by fighting Ma’am. Fighters fight.

L: I have some arthritis in my knee and have to be careful with my back.

T: Fighters fight Ma’am. You gonna tell your attacker you got Arthritis in your knee. Get off the pot lady. You want to learn to fight or not.

L: Well yes, but…

T: No buts, Ma’am. Fighters fight. Fighters don’t say but.

L: Isn’t there a progressive program. Are there belts and stuff?

T: No Ma’am, we just fight. The only belt your likely to see is the one the guy on the street will wrap around your neck. See my point Ma’am.

L: You sound pretty tough.

T: No Ma’am, I’m not tough, I just fight. Real men fight.

L: But I’m not a man.

T: The mugger on the street doesn’t care if you’re a woman or a man Ma’am. You want to fight or not?

L: Well I do like to learn some self defense.

T: That’s not the question Ma’am. I said do you want to learn to fight. Pay attention Ma’am. You got to listen to what I say if you want to learn to fight.

L: Well I know your right. My brother used to fight on the street ALL the time.

T: That’s not fighting Ma’am. People who fight on the street don’t know the first thing about fighting.

L: But he won all the time.

T: Luck Ma’am. Real fighters have skill, not luck. You want luck or you want skill. Make up your mind lady.

L: Well skill I guess is good.

T: We don’t guess Ma’am we know it’s good.

L: Well how long until I can fight?

T: We fight right away Ma’am. You’re a fighter or you aren’t. If you aren’t fighting, you’re not learning.

L: Is it safe?

T: You think fighting is safe Ma’am? Fighting is intense. If someone’s not trying to take your head off then your not learning fighting.

L: Isn’t that dangerous?

T: No Ma’am, we wear protection.

L: So you try to take your students head off when he has protection?

T: That’s right Ma’am, you got it.

L: Do I have to spar and enter tournaments to progress? My friend studies Karate and he says he has to enter tournaments.

T: Your friend knows nothing Ma’am. Tournaments are not fighting. Tournaments don’t prepare you for the street. Fighters fight, they don’t enter tournaments.

L: Ok, what do I do now.

T: You try to stop that 200-pound guy rushing at you with a shield.

L: Golly, I could never do that. Isn’t there something I need to know first?

T: No Ma’am, you learn fighting by doing.

L: Well how can you measure my progress?

T: If your not lying on the floor Ma’am, then you’re progressing.

L: Well can I think about your program and get back to you?

T: Fighters don’t think Ma’am they fight.

L: Well Ok, thank you very much for the informative lesson.

T: Your welcome Ma’am.

[t_niehoff]

Victor,

It's not a question of degree or "timing" in the training, it's more fundamental than that. For example, you can't learn the simplest things, like the punch, the basic WCK punch, without fighting. Punching isn't just throwing out your arm or even connecting it to whole body power, although that's a part of it -- it is being able to actually hit someone while fighting and "have it count." Otherwise, you don't have a fighting tool. You can't develop that without trying to hit someone who is actually genuinely resisiting (trying to stop you and trying to hit you back). Punching in chi sao or any drill isn't punching like you would do in a fight (there are lots of other variables that are involved); your "opponent" and you aren't going full-out, which changes all kinds of things a great deal. Folks who don't fight think that they'll develop their punching and then be able to put it into fighting (should the need arise) -- it doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way for boxers, bjjers, fencers, etc. The development and the fighting need to go hand-in-hand. You learn a tool, drill the tool (chi sao and san sao), and then put it into fighting. Then you'll find that the fighting informs the "form"/technique and the drill (changes them to suit the individual), which changes one's training to make one's fighting better. This is what produces results. Fighting is the self-correcting mechanism of the fighting arts. It's what permits us to improve. No fighting equals no improvement.

Regards,

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ray:

Comedy skills you definitely have...but can you fight?

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Ray:

Comedy skills you definitely have...but can you fight?

Of course. Can't you? So far I haven't seen anyone on this forum fight anyone else who can really fight. Everyone can fight. Depends against who.

In all videos the teacher beats up someone who can't fight.

I have heard opinions over the years that say no Wing Chun sifu that I know of can fight and that includes William Cheung, Wong Shun Leung, Wang Kiu, Lok Yiu, Tsui Shan Ting and even Yip Man.

My model is learn the classical stuff, fight a bit while you are doing it. Then when you cover the system, go out and fight. Some people will be good fighters and some won't. Not everyone can make a great fighter.

[sihing]

LOL..that's one of the funnest things I have seen on this forum. Good observations Ray, lol....

James

[YongChun]

Complex sentences don't seem to work so I tried the comedy approach but that last one is my view of what was being said.

My approach in it's most simplest primitive form is:

Fighting should be viewed as a whole. When I learned under the Wang Kiu lineage, we learned everything at once so that we saw how all the Wing Chun pieces related. We covered, the forms, Chi sau, and competitive fighting with protection in the first 6 months. Classes were five hours in length. But some students learn better with the step by step approach. Those students we have from other fighting backgrounds don't like any step by step approach they just want fight. We have people in all of the above categories.

[t_niehoff]

**Ray, here's how the conversation would really go --


L: Lady who wants to learn fighting.
T: Instructor of the Terence school.

L:Hello I’m interested to learn some self defense. Do you teach that?

T:No, I teach WCK. Self-defense is much more than fighting. But if you mean you want to learn to fight better to protect yourself, yeah, we can help you.

L: My brother who’s in the army recommended you school to me. He knows about fighting.

T: Great!

L: Well he fought in the Vietnam war.

T: That earns my respect.

L: Well I guess…

T: No, you have to respect folks that stand up for what they believe -- and are willing to put their @ss on the line.

.
.
.

L: So how do I start?

T: You start by fighting -- let's gear you up and see how you do. No expectations, but we, and most especially you, can see where you start from. It's like getting on the scale, we can get a measure of what you can do. This way, you can see your improvement over time, see where you need to improve, see what things you naturally do well, etc. After all, it is about fighting.

L: I have some arthritis in my knee and have to be careful with my back.

T: That's cool, just do the best you can.

L: Isn’t there a progressive program. Are there belts and stuff?

T: No Ma’am, WCk is a chinese martial art and traditionally there were no "rankings". We are very informal but concerned with your individual progress -- increasing your fighting performance level.

L: You sound pretty tough.

T: Not at all. In fact, as you will observe when you watch the class, there is a lot of joking, laughter, fun -- no one has an attitude. We're all here for the same reason: we want to learn WCK and increase our performance levels. Everyone here is trying to help each other do just that.

L: I’m not a man.

T: It will be more difficult for you -- it always is for someone smaller, weaker, etc.

L: Well I do like to learn some self defense.

T: Well, if that's all you want and aren't after developing into a good fighter, WCK probably isn't for you -- you'd be better off taking a "self-defense" course. WCK takes a greater investment of time and training. It's not for everyone.

L: My brother used to fight on the street ALL the time.

T: Like any activity, you get better by doing that activity. I don't advise trying to become a better fighter by getting into streetfights for a number of reasons, including that many people today carry firearms.

L: But he won all the time.

T: Yeah, I have friends that did that too. But I think you'll see that your fighting skill can increase substantially without needing to risk death.

L: Well skill I guess is good.

T: What is the purpose of training if not to develop skill?

L: Well how long until I can fight?

T: You can fight now -- I mean if someone attacked you, wouldn't you fight back? Sure, but you just wouldn't be very good at it since you never have done it. It's like basketball, if you never play, you're not going to be much competition in a game. But the more you play, especially if you get some instruction to help you play, the better your game will be. It is the same in any physical activity.

L: Is it safe?

T: Sure, but realize that fighting is like any contact activity or sport -- it involves some risk. Even playing basketball, you can get poked in the eye, catch an ellbow, etc. We'll have you wear gear, and when you feel more comfortable and have developed confidence, you won't need it as much.

L: Isn’t that dangerous?

T: No. If you have skill, you can deal with it easily. It's the folks with no skill that are alarmed.

L: So you try to take your students head off when he has protection?

T: Do you think you can learn to deal with someone trying to take your head off without ever facing it?

L: Do I have to spar and enter tournaments to progress? My friend studies Karate and he says he has to enter tournaments.

T: It's up to you. Some people like to enter tournaments, some don't. Once you have the experience, you'll be able to judge for yourself.

L: Ok, what do I do now.

T: Let's have you gear up and see what you can do.

L: Golly, I could never do that. Isn’t there something I need to know first?

T: Just do the best you can -- like I said before, we need to get you on the scale. After that, we'll start the training, and you'll have a baseline from which to judge how well your performance is increasing.

L: Well how can you measure my progress?

T: Easily -- you'll see how well you can deal with someone just coming after you, trying to pound you. You'll see what a true fighting environment is like. This will guide you in your training; you'll know what it is you need to be able to handle. Then as you progress through the tools, you'll learn how to put them into that environment, how they build on one another, etc. and you'll see for yourself how it will become more and more easier for you to deal with it. Then, after you develop base level skills, you can try dealing with more skillful fighters.

L: Well can I think about your program and get back to you?

T: No problem -- the door is always open.

L: Well Ok, thank you very much for the informative lesson.

T: Your welcome Ma’am.

[YongChun]

Ok, thanks for the corrections Terence.

[t_niehoff]

KJ wrote:


Terence, Though you haven't offered anything new, your reponse to Ray was nicely written.

Here are the major and consistent shortcomings I see in your arguments (referring to your argument in the general sense, not any single post):

a) Failure to unequivocally define what constitutes "fighting" or a "fight" (and how that differs from all other "performance" based activities including those that others might call sparring or hard chi sau)

**I have explained this before, several times, including to you. Fighting is an environment characterized by intensity, resistance, and intent (to really pound, submit, etc.). Some sparring is fighting, some is not (more a game of tag). No chi sao is fighting. If you think so, go fight and see for yourself.

b) Non-validated assumptions of what others do in practice

**I'm not assuming what anyone does in practice merely saying what we need to do in practice *if* increasing our performance is our goal. If they do it, great; if not, then they should realize the consequences.

c) A personal but non-universal premise that WCK equals fighting (I being among those who do not accept this premise, though it's interesting fodder for discussion)

**Then you are wrong. Of course not all fighting is WCK (just like not all birds are Robins), but WCK is fighting (just like a Robin is a bird). BJJ has a number of tools/techniques, drills, strategic methodology as does WCK. But the quality or skill of a BJJ practitioner is determined by how well they can put all that together in apllication -- in other words, in rolling (fighting). Same with WCK. We have forms, drills including chi sao and san sao, and a strategic methodology. But you can't look at how well someone does a drill, like chi sao, and determine how well they would do in applciation, where everything needs to work together. You can only determine that from seeing application -- fighting. If you think "good" chi sao means you can fight well, go test it.

d) Over reliance on implicit ad hominem commentary (e.g., "if you fought as part of your training, you'd know that.")

**As Jacob Bronowski pointed out, "everytime you know something about the world, there are certain forms of conduct which are obviously rediculous." If someone has the experience of fighting with skillful fighters, they will learn something about the world from that experience. It is easy to say something like "you can be a great fighter without fighting". My point is that no one that fights would ever say anything like that -- because they would know better. The lack of experience is evident in Ray's comment. It's simple, if you believe something then just test it out.

e) Putting a creative spin on what others have said that wasn't what they said

**If I put a spin someone didn't intend, they can point out where I was mistaken.

f) Failure to consider ethics, morality, or larger life context (e.g., "Let's not drag dealing with life's problems into training discussions.") Even a logically valid argument isn't robust until the full picture is taken into account, and where human beings are concerned ethics is never irrelevant.

**We're discussing training methods, so let's stay on topic. When we're talking about how to train to become a better fighter it is nonsense to perk up with "being a real fighter is dealing with cancer". I lost both my parents to cancer, I understand what it is like for someone to fight cancer. But that has nothing at all to do with how to train WCK to produce results. The attempted deflection was not only nonsense but insulting.

It also seems that over-reliance on certain models has become somewhat of a liability rather than a help to your arguments. Models can be wonderfully effective illustrative tools. However, they are not conclusive devices. For one thing, they can also be applied in different ways to support different POV's; this has already been demonstrated with the swimming analogy numerous times, and the same can done with the fencing analogy. Additionally, "All models are wrong" (George Box) in that except when a model of a thing is the very thing itself, then at some point use of the model or analogy will break down.

**There is a overall training principle for developing strength -- progressive resistance. All "methods" that work, that is produce results, rely in some way on that principle. There is also an overall training principle for developing fighting skill. All "methods" that work, that is produce results, rely in some way on that principle -- form/technique, drill, fighting. In other words, making fighting part of one's training. All the examples and models were to illustrate that. If you don't agree with that "model" show me someone that can fight well and increased their performance level that hasn't used it.

I’m hardly a logician, but that's what it looks like from the peanut gallery anyway. Despite these shortcomings, I often find your assertions interesting and thought provoking. There may be some issues I've missed, but I think addressing these areas would greatly strengthen your argument and conclusion.

**Thanks for the back-handed compliment.

Terence

[Matrix]

Terence,

If this person comes into your establishment and asks if you teach self defence, and your answer is "No, I teach WCK. Self-defense is much more than fighting. But if you mean you want to learn to fight better to protect yourself, yeah, we can help you."

Do you really expect the uninitiated to understand what you mean by that? I think their brains may stop at "No". Just an observation.......

[t_niehoff]

Matrix,

If they ask what I mean by that, I'll explain it. But self-defense is a lot more than fighting, and I think it is wrong to suggest to people that WCK will provide SD training -- in fact, most of the time, fighting isn't that necessary for good self-defense. WCK won't tell you how to handle most SD situations IMO; a good self defense class may. What is the WCK answer for when someone pulls a gun and orders you into a car, for example? Once a fight starts, and you need fighting skill, then WCK can help.

Terence

[Matrix]

Terrence,

I agree with what you're saying in terms of self-defence versus fighting etc....

However, you can't expect a neophyte to grasp that distinction from day one.

You need to speak to their level of understanding. In the scenario that you mentioned earlier, I would recommend that when asked "I’m interested to learn some self defense. Do you teach that?"

That you respond with something like........" Yes we do. In fact we believe that self-defence is much more than fighting. Actually, we teach a system called WCK, where you will learn to fight better to protect yourself."

The difference may seem innocuous, but the untrained mind is probably not capable of seeing the distinction between self-defence and what you're saying you teach. To them, at that stage, they are the same thing. That's what I'm trying to say.

Since we all enjoy the swimming analogy so much ;

Customer: "Do you teach swimming?"
Teacher : "No, we teach the XYZ method. Swimming is much more than just staying afloat in water. But if you mean propel your body through a liquid substance such as water, yeah, we can help you." ;)

[YongChun]

** is Terence

**I have explained this before, several times, including to you. Fighting is an environment characterized by intensity, resistance, and intent (to really pound, submit, etc.). Some sparring is fighting, some is not (more a game of tag). No chi sao is fighting. If you think so, go fight and see for yourself.

Ray:
If I stop short of a guys nose in sparing he still realizes it would have got broken but that’s not fighting its tag. If I break his nose, that’s fighting. If I kick my partner’s thigh with a solid shot, that’s not fighting its tag. If I break his knee, that’s fighting. Fighting is characterized by intensity and intent to really break his face. Did I get that right?

**Then you are wrong. Of course not all fighting is WCK (just like not all birds are Robins), but WCK is fighting (just like a Robin is a bird). BJJ has a number of tools/techniques, drills, strategic methodology as does WCK. But the quality or skill of a BJJ practitioner is determined by how well they can put all that together in application -- in other words, in rolling (fighting).

Ray:
Rolling on a rubber mat is not fighting if there is no intent to smash his nose, to really break his arm. It’s only training the same as Chi sau. Rolling on a mat is pretty safe. Slugging it out in the ring is not. The quality of both a WCK and BJJ practitioner is putting it all together against a skilled fighter. A few BJJ have done that, a few WCK have done that.

**Same with WCK. We have forms, drills including chi sao and san sao, and a strategic methodology. But you can't look at how well someone does a drill, like chi sao, and determine how well they would do in application, where everything needs to work together. You can only determine that from seeing application -- fighting. If you think "good" chi sao means you can fight well, go test it.

Ray:
True but if good rolling around on a mat is fighting, then go and test that against the Thais.

** If someone has the experience of fighting with skillful fighters, they will learn something about the world from that experience. It is easy to say something like "you can be a great fighter without fighting". The lack of experience is evident in Ray's comment. It's simple, if you believe something then just test it out.

Ray:
In the old days I had a theory that the wing Chun Butterfly knife could handle the Escrima stick. We tested out that theory with a top Balintawak Escrima teacher. Our one year’s worth of experience against his more than ten. But I suppose that doesn’t count as experience because these fighters were not your club members. And hence don’t count. We tested all kinds of things. If my theory didn’t work in a high speed sparring match then I didn’t need to have a fight to the death with his teacher to further prove that point. The remedy, more drilling, more fighting.

** Additionally, "All models are wrong" (George Box) in that except when a model of a thing is the very thing itself, then at some point use of the model or analogy will break down.

Ray:
That’s true. It reminds me of Steven Wrights comment: “I have a map of the United States,…, It’s actual size.

**There is a overall training principle for developing strength -- progressive resistance.

Ray:
So far anyone else’s progressive resistance model has been discounted by you because their time frame was not quick enough no matter how short or the intensity was not hard enough. To you, only your model seems to be good yet there is no detail provided other than to put on protection and just fight. I believe there can be better ways to progress. Steve Cottrell shows some good links on his tapes. Whether that really works in practice I don’t know unless I see a skillful guy trying that against another skillful guy. In Steve stuff I would say try it against each other then go and try it against a real kicker and a real grappler.

In my Karate days you just went to the middle of the floor and fought. We learned to fight but what quality was there in the fighting? It didn’t lead to a real depth of understanding nor to a high level of skill. It's an easy way for teachers to teach.

What it did do was to ingrain a lot of bad habits that took years and years to undo. What I liked about Wing Chun and Tai Chi was the progressive model. Tai Chi was even more progressive or step-by-step but the road to mastery (being able to fight) was much longer. The Wing Chun model was great up to Chi sau but then there was a discontinuous jump. But that may be just the way it is or the lack of teaching ability the teacher had. Some people have tried to bridge that gap. Going from Chi sau to Thai boxing is a hard path. A few steps in between would help.

It's easy to teach chi sau by just teaching the mechanics and then telling people to go for it with intent. But that's a very poor way to learn and teach.

Of course not all learning can be step by step. In real mathematics it is not step by step process but one with intuitive jumps. In textbook mathematics it is presented in a logical step by step proof. Often these step by step proofs were arrived at in a backwards way.

There is an element of 'Grayness" in all of our discussions since we don't really know what is done in all of our clubs. If we were to view a tape of each of the members clubs we might see that all the fighting looks about the same. If all the members from each club fought each other then there may not be large differences. The talented fighters from each club would prevail. Whether one club would consistently win this proving their theories is hard to say.

Terence, do you think there is any value in any of the other threads on this forum or can everyone just find out the answer to all questions from full contact, hard intensity take your head off sparring?

Your reality based talk if fine actually but then you put in some nonsense here and there about tracing your lineage to the red boat people in order to be credible. Give me a break. What kind of nonsense is that? Does Tyson trace his lineage back to whoever? I trace my lineage back to the Roman Gladiator Kirk Douglas. I'd trace it back to Adam and Eve but I don't think they could fight.

I also don't think all the traditional Kung Fu training methods are junk. I don't believe all these people were idiots. To me learning the traditional way and then going out to fight is also a good way to learn. I don't doubt that each generation can produce better training methods. I believe in evolution so your methods may very well be the best. I would love to see the results in combat.

I have no proof to back up my ideas about traditional training methods but neighter have I seen proof that the modern approach of putting on protection and pounding each other out before having learned the art, produces any better results unless you consider the Ultimate fight between 10th degree Ron VanClief who lasted about 10 seconds as the Ultimate proof.

Ray