How to defend the Thai roundhouse kick?

[YongChun]

Let's have a practical thread. The question is how to defend against the low Thai roundhouse kick to the leg. A few months ago someone posted a video where the guy defending raised his knee up in the standard way and the kicker broke his leg in half. It could easily have been the other way around. That's the problem with light sparring. a simple leg lift is sometimes used but against the right kicker, it will get your leg broken for sure. Other methods are to do a front kick or to move and kick the kickers support leg or just try to avoid the thing which usually is not possible. To use the Thai defenses you better have conditioned limbs.

[SevenStar]

nothing wrong with a leg block - you gotta have the technique right. when you lift the leg, make sure the foot is flexed and not pointed downward - pointing it downward can result in your ankle being broken. also, angle the leg outward 45 degrees or so, making sure that you block with the shin bone and not the muscle on the side of the leg.

another counter is a good ole fashioned cross - as he does the kick, step in and punch. the punch will stop his momentum, ruining the kick.

you can also teep to his midsection, having the same effect - ruining the kicks momentum.

you may kick the supporting leg as you stated.this is called a cut kick. takes pretty good timing to pull them off against a low kick though.

you can shuffle backwards and allow the kick to pass you by.

[stonecrusher69]

if you block with your shin bone is it not going to be very painful?the shin bone is very sensitive.

[reneritchie]

Make friends with a real Thai boxer. Have them kick you slowly and low powered. Figure out what to do. Then have them increase speed and power step by step and see if your solution holds up under increased pressure. Adjust as needed. Then try it on other real Thai boxers.

Although Bruce Lee is over deified, his point of Jeet Kune Do existing only in the moment of successful application is a good and often overlooked one.

If you can stop a Thai kick, or a wrestling shoot, or a Hung Ga punch or whatever is a question only answered in the moment.

[t_niehoff]

Oh boy! Another "how do I defend against the -fill in the blank-?" thread. I'll give you the definitive answer: it depends (on the opponent, on you, on what's going on in the moment, i.e., position, movement, etc., and so on). Questions such as these are individual and can only be found from application. FWIW, these types of threads aren't "practical" but are theoretical.

Regards,

Terence

[KFD]

shut the kick down out of the gate. use a hitting kick or whatever, hit his thigh/knee, anything to throw off his balance before the kick accelerates or anything, as soon as the leg comes up while he's in striking

we have footwork like paak gerk, gum gerk, etc. why not use them?

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Oh boy! Another "how do I defend against the -fill in the blank-?" thread. I'll give you the definitive answer: it depends (on the opponent, on you, on what's going on in the moment, i.e., position, movement, etc., and so on). Questions such as these are individual and can only be found from application. FWIW, these types of threads aren't "practical" but are theoretical.

Regards,

Terence

What's wrong with these threads. I wonder why anyone bothers to put out any tapes and books or discusses anything for that matter. Why even teach students. Just put on the protection and let them fight. I guess you agree with Moy Yat. Everything is OK, it's up to you. You start with a theory and then you test it. THai boxing articles talk about methods and so do BJJ articles. Then you go and try these methods. The forms are examples of ideas to try. Don't be so arrogant. THere are many kinds of people on this forum. How much help is your post to the beginners?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by stonecrusher69
if you block with your shin bone is it not going to be very painful?the shin bone is very sensitive.

conditioning is a beautiful thing. the shin is a blocking and kicking surface. when you first begin training, wear shin guards - nothing wrong with that. as time goes on and you kick the thai pads, heavy bag, etc. you will be able to take the shin guards off and not experience pain while blocking.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by YongChun
What's wrong with these threads. I wonder why anyone bothers to put out any tapes and books or discusses anything for that matter. Why even teach students. Just put on the protection and let them fight. I guess you agree with Moy Yat. Everything is OK, it's up to you. You start with a theory and then you test it. THai boxing articles talk about methods and so do BJJ articles. Then you go and try these methods. The forms are examples of ideas to try. Don't be so arrogant. THere are many kinds of people on this forum. How much help is your post to the beginners?

threads like this tend to degenerate into "What if" scenarios. That's probably what he's getting at.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by KFD
shut the kick down out of the gate. use a hitting kick or whatever, hit his thigh/knee, anything to throw off his balance before the kick accelerates or anything, as soon as the leg comes up while he's in striking

we have footwork like paak gerk, gum gerk, etc. why not use them?

here's an example of how they can degenerate into "what if" threads:


I personally don't like kicking and the leg in an attempt to stop it - that is to small a target to rely on. What happens if you miss the leg? you get hit. Even if you are kicking his upper thigh, which is a bigger area than the knee, if you hit the bottm as opposed to hitting squarely, your foot rolls off and you may still get hit. Notice, when I posted a similar technique, I advocated hitting the midsection - it's a much wider target area and much harder to miss.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"...make sure that you block with the shin bone and not the muscle on the side of the leg."
(SevenStar)

I've got to differ with this...

What I'm about to describe is something I've come up with lately after many years of simply lifting the leg up to absorb the kick. Admittedly - I haven't tried this yet against someone trained in Muay-Thai...but some of my most advanced students have been in the arts for 15-18 years...coming from karate, TKD, and kickboxing backgrounds. Some of these guys do have a serious and powerful low roundhouse kick to the legs. (Have been on the receiving end during sparring enough times through the years to testify to this).

First of all...I don't like going shin-to-shin...because if he's bigger, stronger, and has spent more time toughening his shins than I have - that 5hit's going to really hurt!

So I prefer absorbing the kick at the side of the calf muscle - but that hurts like hell too! If that's all you do. Not to mention the fact that this move doesn't put him on the defensive - it simply saves you from taking an even harder kick to the very vulnerable thigh muscle and/or the back of your knee-joint. So lately I've been working with the following move with good success almost all of the time.

And in fact, I've found that the harder he tries to kick you - the easier it is to pull this off - because he's more committed to the kick than otherwise and therefore will find it much harder to counter the move I'm about to describe.

Let's say we're both in a left front stance and he throws the low rear roundhouse with his right leg at my left thigh...

I receive the kick with the side of my calf muscle near the shin...so the 45 degree angle in this case means that my calf muscle area near the shin is directly facing the kick's point-of-contact - while simultaneously throwing a downward hammerfist-type blow with my left fist/forearm at his leg - which immediately turns into a grab of his leg (wrap from underneath - in other words - overhook his leg)...and then immediately follow this by taking your left leg and his trapped right leg backwards (while still in the air) - so that you wind up in a right front stance (with both feet back down on the floor) and his right leg is trapped and up in the air.

Also...your right arm/hand is now doing a stiff, straight-arm grab of his right arm (if he's got it forward) - if not ...keep the straight-arm position so as to keep his body away from you (once he's trapped...if he's smart...he should try to hop into you and wrap his arms close to your upper body - thereby bringing his whole body closer to you - and therefore no longer having his leg extended and very vulnerable )...

so the straight arm will stop him from doing this...

there's more to come from this new position - so that you put him down on the floor...but I'll let it go at this for now.

One note of caution: On the initial move - don't have your raised left knee too close to your body - otherwise your balance is jeopardized and a powerful kicker might come through your defense put you right down on the floor...and the 45 degree angle is also very important not only for the proper balance and facing - but to also make sure that the kick doesn't come around your leg to the point that his toes might actually find your groin. (Your calf muscle - which will receive the kick - must face the point-of-contact directly).

One final note: The downward hammerfist strike also serves the purpose of mitigating the power on his kick - by striking his kicking leg you are therefore moving it downward - so that no one point of your calf muscle is taking the shot...and by spreading out the area of contact...you are taking less pain at any one given spot on your leg (similar to dissolving his force)...which is also what you're doing with the full step backward move...you're kind of going with the force and riding out it's impact.

[YongChun]

The excellent posts in reply to the question proves to me that this question was not a waste of everyone's time. Maybe someone else on this forum has wondered about these things so then when they read these posts they can go and try some of the suggestions. Perhaps its something they have not tried before. In my mind there are no stupid questions to be asked. I know in school lots of guys are afraid to ask a question in case everyone else in the class laughs at them and thinks them stupid. even the dumbest question can lead to something. To what, nobody knows until we get going with a few opinions. The roundhouse kick to the lower leg is probably the first thing you face when fighting a good Thai stylist. The straight kick and straight punch don't have the same scare factor. However there was an Okanawan master who gave a seminar once and when sparring he would only use the front snap kick. No one was able to stop it because he was a master at its setup.

Natural for me is the leg lift but against a very hard kicker I don't like the technique because my leg might break unless it was really conditioned. Against poor kickers or in light sparring it always works OK. Kicking straight isn't bad I find and trying to use footwork to not be there but not anyone thing will constantly work and as Terence said depends on a lot of things. The most common thing I see in Thai photos seems to be the leg lift but they have the conditioning for it too.

[namron]

UWC, sounds interesting, got a clip of that one?

The posts I've read on this thread , I've generally liked.

The thread assumes a low round house on the outside of the lead leg.

What modifications / suggestions would you put up for checking / evading the same low roundhouse kick targeting the inside of the lead leg?

Lookin forward to learning something new.

;) :D

[SAAMAG]

There are a couple things that I learned from my thai boxing coach that I don't think were mentioned here...they deal mostly with shui jiao or throwing counters.

One method we employ is to counter with an elbow just above the knee of the kicker as you move in to take up the space, once that stops the force we grab the kicking leg and sweep out the foundation leg. Upon proper application this happens almost simultaneously mind you. I guess in wing chun terms you would use sip ma (circle advance) to tai jong, wrapping the leg and performing a soo gurk? I suppose it depends on the terminology of your lineage.

To me this technique transposes from shui jiao, to muay thai to wing chun pretty seamlessly. Fighting is fighting after all right?

Just another thing for you all to chew on.

[Ultimatewingchun]

namron:

Have it on video tape...but I'm a real low level computer guy. Have no clue about how to post it on this forum.

As to the roundhouse coming at the inside part of the leg - much harder to deal with. I use a move that is just slightly similar to the other one I described - but without the grab and trap of his kicking leg.

Assume you're in a left front stance - he's in a right front - and he throws the roundhouse at the inside of your left leg with his left.
Lift the lead leg up, turn and point the shin at his shin (so you probably will go shin-to-shin on this one)...but the mitigating factor is to hammerfist down on his kicking leg with your left fist and forearm. (It's very important to use the hammerfist at the exact moment of leg-to-leg contact). And as I explained earlier - this will diffuse the shock and force of the kick because you're spreading the area of impact to be wider than it would have been.

Note: Try to raise you're knee high enough so that the shin-to-shin contact might work to your advantage - because you might wind up actually dropping your leg/shin down on his kick from above it...and this angle (and the force of gravity) might result in actually kicking his kick with more force than what he's doing to you...and might even result in dropping your shinbone down on his leg slightly past his shinbone and onto a fleshier part of his leg...which means you have a stronger weapon hitting a weaker one. By the way - this move does require lifting and bringing your knee close to your body.

Note of caution:

Keep your rear hand (wu sao) high and near your left ear as you do this move - so as to protect that side of your face/head against him trying to follow with a punch to this area...and similarly - immediately return your left arm up to it's natural guarding position after the hammerfist.

[RaNGeR.GaV]

What do you guys think about using a straight front snap-kick (as I guess it would be called), into the mid-rif/hip area? (not sure if anyone has mentioned that option). If the kick was coming from your opponents back leg, then a quick and timed front kick would (in my mind), send him backwards and rob the majority of the power out of his kick.
The major draw back is that if you kick with your left (to counter his right kick), you might risk him reaching your rear leg (right leg in this case), if you don't nail him hard enough. Though that might be down to a matter of your opponents reach (if he's aimed for your left leg and you kick him with it, then theres no leg there to kick).

Thoughts?

[Phil Redmond]

I know a few ways to defend against a low leg kick. I'll attempt to make a video of the concept Victor is talking about. I'll post it here in a couple of days.
PR

[Edmund]

Originally posted by RaNGeR.GaV
What do you guys think about using a straight front snap-kick (as I guess it would be called), into the mid-rif/hip area? (not sure if anyone has mentioned that option). If the kick was coming from your opponents back leg, then a quick and timed front kick would (in my mind), send him backwards and rob the majority of the power out of his kick.
The major draw back is that if you kick with your left (to counter his right kick), you might risk him reaching your rear leg (right leg in this case), if you don't nail him hard enough. Though that might be down to a matter of your opponents reach (if he's aimed for your left leg and you kick him with it, then theres no leg there to kick).

Thoughts?

The "teep" that Seven Star refers to is the same idea.


Some good responses here.

The main thing is to practice.

The Thai's wear shinpads to spar.
The reason being they don't want to injure their shins. They've got to look after them and save it for real matches. They aren't dumb. They use bags and pads to condition their shins.
I'd suggest everyone do the same.

The second thing is to understand the theory in Muay Thai.
Defending doesn't score points in Muay Thai so it's important to be able to strike them back when they are kicking at you.

If your opponent kicks, he's vulnerable after the kick is delivered or sometimes before he even kicks. Every time the opponent makes a move there's opportunities and openings especially with kicks due to the amount of body movement involved. This leads to the really counterattacking style that you see in good Muay Thai.

So in practice, after you defend (using whatever method you prefer), get used to counter attacking straight away before they even put their leg down.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by RaNGeR.GaV
What do you guys think about using a straight front snap-kick (as I guess it would be called), into the mid-rif/hip area? (not sure if anyone has mentioned that option). If the kick was coming from your opponents back leg, then a quick and timed front kick would (in my mind), send him backwards and rob the majority of the power out of his kick.
The major draw back is that if you kick with your left (to counter his right kick), you might risk him reaching your rear leg (right leg in this case), if you don't nail him hard enough. Though that might be down to a matter of your opponents reach (if he's aimed for your left leg and you kick him with it, then theres no leg there to kick).

Thoughts?

yeah, that was the teep I was talking about. However, I wouldn't recommend using a snap kick - the teep is more of a push kick. the push will break his balance and may knock him backward in addition to stopping the kick. A snap kick may not. Use your lead leg - your rear, while more powerful, is slower.

[sihing]

Originally posted by Edmund
The second thing is to understand the theory in Muay Thai.
Defending doesn't score points in Muay Thai so it's important to be able to strike them back when they are kicking at you.

If your opponent kicks, he's vulnerable after the kick is delivered or sometimes before he even kicks. Every time the opponent makes a move there's opportunities and openings especially with kicks due to the amount of body movement involved. This leads to the really counterattacking style that you see in good Muay Thai.
So in practice, after you defend (using whatever method you prefer), get used to counter attacking straight away before they even put their leg down.

Agreed. When teaching kicking defenses I always stress the you should counter before the kickers leg hits the ground, when applying a deflection of some sort, or just stop kicking before the kick gets off. When deflecting you have to off balance him/her by attacking the knee on their kick, whether it is with the palm, or for low kicks the shin on knee, and while that is happening you attack simultaneously.

James

[namron]

UWC thanks for the additional explanation. Cant quite wrap my mind around it, I'm more a visual student, when I see it I'm sure it will click.

Phil if you manage to find time to post a clip of the concept Victors talking about it would be great.

regs

namron

[Ultimatewingchun]

Phil:

I'll send you a copy of the video I have that shows the defense against the first kick mentioned on this thread ...I don't have the second one on film yet.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

What's wrong with these threads.

**They start from the position of "technique X is the answer to technique Y" which is already a fundamental mistake in approach (thinking). Someone taking that tack will never develop much skill. In other words, if you're looking at the problem from the wrong perspective, you'll never solve it.

I wonder why anyone bothers to put out any tapes and books or discusses anything for that matter.

**Books or tapes won't, and can't, teach one application. I have no problem with discussion -- you can get a group of people that never get in the water and they can discuss how to deal with an undertow too -- but they won't come up with the "answer." Any answer begins with first learning to swim (surprising as it may sound, that will actually provide you with the answer).

Why even teach students. Just put on the protection and let them fight.

**That is a necessary part of "teaching students" application. You learn application from application. That's the only way.

I guess you agree with Moy Yat. Everything is OK, it's up to you.

**Rather, application depends on me (what I bring to the encounter), my opponent (what he brings to the encounter), and the situation (circumstances). For example, I may be able to use my punch, jik chung choi, to beat his thai kick if I have an advantage in reach or speed or he telegraphs or give me the proper range or etc. I *know* that because I've done it against thai boxers and so have others I train with. That doesn't always work since it depends on me, my opponent, and the circumstances. As they change, so will my "answer." You learn application, what works >for you< and when, from application.

You start with a theory and then you test it.

**Actually, that is the wrong way to go about it IME. You begin with application (trying to make your tools work) and that leads you to the "theory" or principle. If you begin from theory, you'll never get it.

THai boxing articles talk about methods and so do BJJ articles. Then you go and try these methods.

**First you get a tool, develop the tool, then put it into fighting. In trying to use that tool in fighting (and become more successful in application), one will find the principles.

The forms are examples of ideas to try.

**No, the linked sets contain the tools of WCK arranged thematically.

Don't be so arrogant. THere are many kinds of people on this forum. How much help is your post to the beginners?

**See my first response above -- it won't help "a beginner" to have your perspective. That will only hinder their progress.

Regards,

Terence

[SAAMAG]

.You start with a theory and then you test it.

**Actually, that is the wrong way to go about it IME. You begin with application (trying to make your tools work) and that leads you to the "theory" or principle. If you begin from theory, you'll never get it.

This part, in and of itself I do not agree with. If theory was not involved prior to the event, where did the "tools" come from? The main weapon humans use to their advantage is their brains. That's how we prevailed from the inception of time till now. "Trail and error". Trail was the act of putting theory into practice. Error occurred when that theory was not successful in the application whereby the person would then rethink the theory and try something new. Now obviously this was usually based on something happening first, and thus the cycle begins, but to say that theories don't lead to success is not correct.

I don't think the wright brothers jumped off cliffs to see if they could fly. They knew already that wouldnt work and thought of a theory based on trail and error, imperical evidence, and devised that it could happen using mechanics. They thought out their theories and then tested them in application.

But then maybe I misinterpreted your statement...

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Vankuen
I don't think the wright brothers jumped off cliffs to see if they could fly. They knew already that wouldnt work and thought of a theory based on trail and error, imperical evidence, and devised that it could happen using mechanics. They thought out their theories and then tested them in application.

But then maybe I misinterpreted your statement...

Guessing at what Terence might say:
The Wright brothers weren't real men. Real men would have jumped off the cliff first to see if they could fly. After that they would have developed a theory.

Real men start wars and then see what happens. After that they develop a theory for peace.

A real man would know that. A dryland swimming man wouldn't.

Ray

[YongChun]

Well, I’m in total shock this morning. I was flipping through an issue of Grappling magazine and to my horror I saw some of the Gracies explaining five ideas for countering the mount. I couldn’t believe it. Real men don’t teach or explain things. Real me just fight. They just shut up and fight. These Gracie guys think that techniques actually work. Who are they trying to kid? What’s this, a reprint from April 1, fools day? Those guys don’t know the first thing about teaching. To teach you suit up and try to pound each other’s heads off. That’s teaching, that’s learning. Only wimps ask questions. Real men suit up and fight. All answers in martial arts come from that. That Grappler magazine is an insult to real men. Real men, fight, they don’t read and think. Just fight. They don’t discuss, just fight. Suit up and fight. Picture magazines are fine they can show the pounding someone gets. That’s for real men. Why waste time with words. Now the Gracies have also become members of the dry land swimming group.

[KingMonkey]

This swimming analogy stuff is getting really old.
Please move on.

There is nothing wrong with throwing out a few techniques for people to go out and try. The important thing is that they use these as a base for developing their own feeling/preference for dealing with this stuff.

My feeling is that only two approaches give me much of a chance vs a good kicker.

1) Move in as soon as kicking range is reached, aggressively crowding the space, relying on position and my own attacks to shut down the kick as opposed to individual techniques.

2) Use mirroring/footwork to hold the distance at extreme kicking range and wait for the first attempt to kick, hope for some over commitment and move in immediately after, see above.

To be honest I have quite slow reactions so this influences my approach but I train JKD with Thai boxers and if you've only trained vs kicks from WC training partners you probably underestimate the speed of delivery and power these guys generate. It's their bread and butter stuff.

If you can recognize their kicks, track them and fire off a kick of your own before you get hit you're a better man than me.

Just my humble opinion of course.

[YongChun]

YongChun wrote:

What's wrong with these threads.

**They start from the position of "technique X is the answer to technique Y" which is already a fundamental mistake in approach (thinking).

RVR – that’s totally wrong. Wing Chun is a principles based system and yet it also has techniques. If you are creative enough and have to ability to analyze something then you can actually discuss a situation in fighting from many perspectives including a technique base, a principles base and from a base of actual experience. If someone got their ankle broken from a leg lift with the toe pointing down, and writes an article that advises people to not do that, then this is useful. If someone develops a new counter to a takedown technique, then that’s useful. Of course to real men that’s not useful because real men learn from their own experience and not from the experience of others.

**Books or tapes won't, and can't, teach one application. I have no problem with discussion -- you can get a group of people that never get in the water and they can discuss how to deal with an undertow too -- but they won't come up with the "answer." Any answer begins with first learning to swim (surprising as it may sound, that will actually provide you with the answer).

RVR – surprising as it may sound a few people who have written articles have actually been able to swim. Another thing I found surprising is that there are actually fighters who have actually discussed something. Of course no one reads that trash. Real men wouldn’t get caught dead reading a magazine.

You start with a theory and then you test it.

**Actually, that is the wrong way to go about it IME. You begin with application (trying to make your tools work) and that leads you to the "theory" or principle. If you begin from theory, you'll never get it.

RVR – How can you have tools if no one has given you any tools to work with? I guess you mean your own tools that you have developed when a real Thai boxer splinters up your legs. You shouldn’t read anything about Thai boxers first. You shouldn’t read about the type of conditioning needed to fight them. You should just go and fight them. If your not a wimp that’s what you do. Your tools will automatically come from that. If you get kicked often enough then you eventually learn. Don’t waste the teacher’s time by asking him something. Real fighters fight and don’t ask questions.

**First you get a tool, develop the tool, then put it into fighting. In trying to use that tool in fighting (and become more successful in application), one will find the principles.

RVR – some people they read the more useful responses in this thread to come up with a tool or maybe learn about some variation that they haven't tried before. Then they go and try that in their club. Then if it doesn’t work they come back to the forum and ask those who have experience what the problem is. The helpful members will try to give their perspective on the situation. But real fighters would tell you to stop asking questions and just fight. Real men fight, they don’t talk.

The forms are examples of ideas to try.

**No, the linked sets contain the tools of WCK arranged thematically.

RVR – my forms contain principles for combat. They contain ideas. My forms contain ideas for developing power, for developing mobility while maintaining root. My forms contain the idea of the centerline, of economy of movement, of the changes possible. They develop a calmness to be transposed over into fighting. My forms have ideas for attack and defense. My pole form has the idea for attack and for defense. My forms have ideas and they have the techniques and tools.

**See my first response above -- it won't help "a beginner" to have your perspective. That will only hinder their progress.

RVR – there are more ways to teach a beginner than to have them pound each other out to learn the hard way how to fight. I guess you don’t have experience to teach different kinds of people? Our beginners learn the form, learn applications, learn drills, ask questions and fight. That’s what they do. Your beginners just suit up and fight. Two different ways to teach. The latter way is of course the easier way to teach. You don’t need to do anything. No forms, no drills, no explanations. Just fight. All learning comes from fighting. If your not fighting your wasting your time.

[YongChun]

I like to translate the roundhouse kick to the equivalent of getting a baseball bat swung into your head, hip, ribs, elbow, knees or shin by a professional batter. Some students first reaction is to use the Gan sau to try to stop a midlevel roundhouse kick the same that broke the arms of two Wong Shun Leung students in Hong Kong. If I use the baseball bat idea then they can see right away that they wouldn’t like to try and stop a swing from a professional baseball batter with this technique. That’s another way to explain things as opposed to finding a real Thai fighter to see if he can bust your arms or not. The leg lift against a low roundhouse kick has the same problem in my opinion. If you want to use that then you better have pretty good conditioning and bones a lot harder than those of your opponent. In Escrima stick work they work in different least pressure zones as opposed to standing stationary and try to use so force against force block. In out Bat Jam Do set we use the same type of zoning. I try to use a simultaneous kick. Sometimes I have succeeded with the sole of the foot against the shin of the roundhouse but it’s easy to miss compared to the leg life and elbow protection method. A bat can do similar damage to the kick of a real Thai kicker but I think the kick might come in faster?

The bat analogy can only go so far however because a kick and a bat swing are two different animals. I only use it to get a point across about how forceful a good kick can really be.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
. while simultaneously throwing a downward hammerfist-type blow with my left fist/forearm at his leg - which immediately turns into a grab of his leg (wrap from underneath - in other words - overhook his leg)..


Originally posted by Vankuen
One method we employ is to counter with an elbow just above the knee of the kicker as you move in to take up the space, once that stops the force we grab the kicking leg and sweep out the foundation leg. Both of these allow you to grab the leg. The second method, however, is safer, as it doesn't require you to drop one of your defending hands down to attack the leg. The second method also hurts the kicker more because of the concentrated force of the elbow strike. The first method also lends itself more readily to being vulnerable to the set-up of a fake kick followed by a high line strike.

[YongChun]

In one WC school I went to we drilled a lot on getting exact distance such that you are millimeters away from getting kicked and such that it would take a single step to get in. We used a propulsion kind of step like a runner taking off in a race, lifting the heel of the rear foot as opposed to the dragging step which we also had. We would try that against a variety of kicks. The kicker would of course adjust to the tactic and make you misjudge the distance. That teacher sparred regularly against TaeKwonDo to teat out that stuff. I don't know if he tried against any Thais. However his TaeKwonDo teacher in Holland regularly sparred against some Thai fighters there and developed various way to cope with those. One technique he had success with was the toe kick into the solar plexus when the first sign of a roundhouse kick came.

[edward]

just walk in

[Phil Redmond]

Yong Chun,
I know your query was about a low kick to the leg but here is an example of a kick to the head. The defense against a low kick to the leg would use similar foot work. The TWC side neutral stance does not have any one leg forward so an opponent would have to get past the guard (hands), to get to the leg.
http://www.free-element.com/wingchun/isolation_drill3.mpg
http://www.free-element.com/wingchun/isolation_drill3a.mpg
When I get the chance I'll do some clips on the low kick.
PR

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
Yong Chun,
I know your query was about a low kick to the leg but here is an example of a kick to the head.

Thanks Phil. The intent of the thread was really any kind of round kick especially whatever Thais throw at you and the kick to the head is one. Clips are always nice to look at for people to get ideas to try.

Ray

[Vajramusti]

ed--- but- but- but what if- what if -someone does not know how to walk properly.Moider most foul....specially if they dont have hands either!!

[SAAMAG]

Funny how people complain about the what if's...when the only person that what if'd posted just before me, and it was in jest. I could see someone complain if it was happening...but cmon people....the magazines are full of this stuff...but do you stop buying the magazines because of it? Give it a rest. If you don't want to see the what if's ....don't read the thread. Period.

Now to what ed said...I would say that is the safest route to someone who is aggressive enough to know what to do once they're in. Otherwise they just put themselves into a worse scenario.

I guess the whole thing is you just don't want to take the full brunt of the kick. Deciding whether to move in or to let the kick sail by or to block is kinda like deciding to run a red light when you're right at that point where you could stop and run the risk of not stopping in time...or drive thru it and run the risk of running the red and getting the ticket should a cop see you. It's that awkward moment that gets people most of the time...when you're positioning is not quite right, when your setup isnt where it was during training...when things aren't exactly as you were hoping they would be. This is when you have to adapt and overcome...this is where the outcome is decided because things rarely every happen the way you hope they will. If that was the case people would be walking into my foot everytime I kicked.

[old jong]

IMHO-
Sometimes you should "just walk in",sometimes you should step on the side,sometimes you should step at an angle,sometimes you should raise your leg to absorb,sometimes you should move back...( :eek: ) Sometimes you should kick the kick,sometimes you should kick his supporting leg,sometimes....You get the idea?...;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

"To be honest I have quite slow reactions so this influences my approach but I train JKD with Thai boxers and if you've only trained vs kicks from WC training partners you probably underestimate the speed of delivery and power these guys generate. It's their bread and butter stuff.

If you can recognize their kicks, track them and fire off a kick of your own before you get hit you're a better man than me."
(KingMonkey)

I agree with this completely.

Simply walking in on a roundhouse kick is very overestimated, imo. Good Muay Thai and kickboxing fighters will rarely throw the roundhouse kick at a distance where you can simply "walk in" on it.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Simply walking in on a roundhouse kick is very overestimated, imo. Good Muay Thai and kickboxing fighters will rarely throw the roundhouse kick at a distance where you can simply "walk in" on it. Exactly. If I walk in on my shooto teacher (with long exp of thai inc contests in Thailand) he's taking both my pansy assed groucho-marx wing chun funny walk legs! :D

You have to use your footwork, cos thai's footwork is always changing, and like their kicks, unless you train that way, always faster than ours.

The snap kick isn't as good as a stop kick imo. It's not a sure enough stopper, and you're more likely to go off balance.

A stop kick, whether stepping in from a longer range and hacking out their ankle, or from a shorter range to their knee or stomach (or a shorter range and using your tan gerk with a stop kick drive inwards as a knee to the stomach) is using a lot of forward motion, and putting all your weight into the kicking leg, like the thai kick, so it isn't putting you off balance and it's kind of beating them at their own game, yet still cutting in the shortest route to centreline.

On whether to block with the shin or the calf, I don't think it matters (but then my shins are naturally very resilient!!!:D ), though I was taught the outside of the calf in my wc. I think it's more important to get the angle of the tan gerk right, so even if it's low it's angling down and keeping a downward and forward energy as you bounce off/through it into your kick.

I've been caught out with this before (actually against a hsingyi low kick not a thai roundhouse), where you complacently twitch the calf off the ground in your self-assured back weighted wc stance, and the kick cuts through both your legs (and I landed up on my arse!). You have to have energy in it, same as the arms!!

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"...while simultaneously throwing a downward hammerfist-type blow with my left fist/forearm at his leg - which immediately turns into a grab of his leg (wrap from underneath - in other words - overhook his leg)..."


Originally posted by Vankuen
"One method we employ is to counter with an elbow just above the knee of the kicker as you move in to take up the space, once that stops the force we grab the kicking leg and sweep out the foundation leg."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Both of these allow you to grab the leg. The second method, however, is safer, as it doesn't require you to drop one of your defending hands down to attack the leg. The second method also hurts the kicker more because of the concentrated force of the elbow strike. The first method also lends itself more readily to being vulnerable to the set-up of a fake kick followed by a high line strike."
(Knifefighter)

On the contrary....The first method is safer (if done right you're definitely outside of his hand striking range). The bigger danger to the man using the second method is that it presupposes that you can simply "move in to take up his space"...and then deliver the elbow strike ABOVE his knee...

So you've let more than half of his kicking leg into your space before engaging it? That is a major gamble, imo. This guy is kicking very fast - presumably. No - I don't think this is a high percentage counter to his kick.

Again...To assume that you can simply move in and take his space away is an overrated notion.

As to being "faked"...not if you're watching his kicking knee with full attention.

[YongChun]

Here's the roundhouse kick in action:

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/388/

[Phil Redmond]

Gan/gan against the front kick then a double lop against the round kick. You have to 'cradle' the kick and redirect it. If you try to meet it head on you may have trouble.
http://www.free-element.com/wingchun/front-rd-counter.mpeg

I have used this in kickboxing matches against good kickers so I know it can work. And yes, I have used it against Thai boxers.
(The idea that only Thai kickers can kick hard is a misconception).
http://www.free-element.com/wingchun/kwan_sau.wmv
PR

[Mr Punch]

All this talk of catching the kick is making my ribs ache. For a start wasn't the question about a low roundhouse to the legs? If I'm going down there to catch something, all I'm gonna catch is the next knee. And even if it's above the waist I'd better be **** sure my elbow had good position or my arm's breaking or my ribs are taking it.

Ultimate, how is your hammerfist going in? With a right leg kick, with the right arm? You going back along the line of the kick or at an angle or down or what?

I like Phil Redmond's two-handed lop for a high one, or even if you get the angle and the footwork right, the double gaun . But as far as high goes I'm a very forward and very fast, so I usually want to keep the pressure up to prevent the opportunity.

From a low kick, does nobody use a tan gerk to jam the knee in above their knee, or a bong gerk to jam it below on the outside (assuming you can let it pass or smother it) and then kick straight through using their balance and momentum? Of course your hands are going in to steady yourself and strike them at the same time...

[Ultimatewingchun]

Mat:

I'm somewhat confused by this...

"Ultimate, how is your hammerfist going in? With a right leg kick, with the right arm? You going back along the line of the kick or at an angle or down or what?"


Could you restate the question?

[Mr Punch]

Well, it's easier to just ask you, how are doing your hammerfist!?

But sure, I'll give it a go...!

When he kicks with his right (I'm assuming it's above the waist) are you hitting with your right hand? Where is your body? Which way did you step, into the area above the knee so the hammerfist is tight near your body, or out to the right, or...?

And is the hammerfist going straight in at rightangles to the direction of his kick? Or is it going at an angle (in which case what angle)? Is it going down?

Is your elbow down like chum jarn or out like a low bong or a short range low gaun?

There you go...! Sorry, just having trouble picturing it, and how you would safely move from the hammerfist to the leg-catch.

[t_niehoff]

vankuen wrote:

Funny how people complain about the what if's...when the only person that what if'd posted just before me, and it was in jest. I could see someone complain if it was happening...but cmon people....the magazines are full of this stuff...but do you stop buying the magazines because of it? Give it a rest. If you don't want to see the what if's ....don't read the thread. Period.

**I'm always surprised by the "solid reasoning" behind so many of these posts -- here's another example of "if it is widespread it must be good" thinking. What that really says is "I don't know what I'm talking about, but lots of others do the same thing, so it can't be bad." Brilliant. Just brilliant.

**And then it's topped off with that common retort used by all those that lack the ability to intelligently defend their "beliefs": "I don't want to hear dissenting views, go away." Brilliant. Just Brilliant.

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

"When he kicks with his right (I'm assuming it's above the waist) are you hitting with your right hand? Where is your body? Which way did you step, into the area above the knee so the hammerfist is tight near your body, or out to the right, or...?

And is the hammerfist going straight in at rightangles to the direction of his kick? Or is it going at an angle (in which case what angle)? Is it going down?

Is your elbow down like chum jarn or out like a low bong or a short range low gaun?

There you go...! Sorry, just having trouble picturing it, and how you would safely move from the hammerfist to the leg-catch."


Mat:

In the example I gave wherein it ends in a leg-catch...I would be going for it if he's kicking with his right leg as an attack against the back of my left thigh or knee area...and the hammerfist is tight near my body...with a very slight step back and to my right with my right foot...immediately preceding lifting my left leg.

or I would use the leg-catch after the hammerfist move if he's kicking with his left leg going for the back of my right thigh/knee area...

In other words...we are in cross front stances to begin with (my left front vs. his left front stance...or my right front stance vs. his right front stance...and he kicks with his rear leg).

So if he kicks with his right - as in your example - I would be lifting my left leg and hammerfisting with my left hand/forearm.

The elbow of the hammerfist is down and in close to my body (often I've found that while my hammer "fist" hit's just below his knee by his upper shin area - my elbow is simultaneously hitting his ankle/foot area.

That should give you some idea of the angle used in the hammerfist strike. Then comes the leg-catch.

[Vajramusti]

IF you have to figure out whether it is a Thai roundhouse kick
you are already behind in timing.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

RVR – that’s totally wrong. Wing Chun is a principles based system and yet it also has techniques.

**Everytime I hear the term "principle-based system" it makes my @ss twitch -- it's just another often repeated myth, especially one theoreticians love. The term is meaningless. Sure WCK has principles, so does many other fighting methods.

If you are creative enough and have to ability to analyze something then you can actually discuss a situation in fighting from many perspectives including a technique base, a principles base and from a base of actual experience. If someone got their ankle broken from a leg lift with the toe pointing down, and writes an article that advises people to not do that, then this is useful. If someone develops a new counter to a takedown technique, then that’s useful. Of course to real men that’s not useful because real men learn from their own experience and not from the experience of others.

**What all your examples do is begin with application and then state a principle based on the experience. That's exactly my point.


RVR – surprising as it may sound a few people who have written articles have actually been able to swim. Another thing I found surprising is that there are actually fighters who have actually discussed something. Of course no one reads that trash. Real men wouldn’t get caught dead reading a magazine.

**There is nothing wrong with articles, they have their place. But discussions of "use X to defeat Y" aren't useful. See below.

RVR – How can you have tools if no one has given you any tools to work with?

**I said you don't begin with "theory"; you do begin with the tools as I said before. See below.

I guess you mean your own tools that you have developed when a real Thai boxer splinters up your legs. You shouldn’t read anything about Thai boxers first. You shouldn’t read about the type of conditioning needed to fight them. You should just go and fight them. If your not a wimp that’s what you do. Your tools will automatically come from that. If you get kicked often enough then you eventually learn. Don’t waste the teacher’s time by asking him something. Real fighters fight and don’t ask questions.

**You keep mocking my postition with "real fighters don't do this or that" or "you're a wimp" and so forth. That sort of thing just displays intellectual bankruptcy -- it's a rather common form of a fallacious argument and when you see it you know that it is the "last resort" of someone that can't marshall a sound, rational argument. In other words, it is the cry of someone acknowledging defeat but feeling the need to say something.

**First you get a tool, develop the tool, then put it into fighting. In trying to use that tool in fighting (and become more successful in application), one will find the principles.

RVR – some people they read the more useful responses in this thread to come up with a tool or maybe learn about some variation that they haven't tried before. Then they go and try that in their club. Then if it doesn’t work they come back to the forum and ask those who have experience what the problem is. The helpful members will try to give their perspective on the situation. But real fighters would tell you to stop asking questions and just fight. Real men fight, they don’t talk.

**What you fail to see is that the very question, or rather the need to ask that question, indicates a failure in >how< they are training in the first place -- in their approach. See below.

**No, the linked sets contain the tools of WCK arranged thematically.

RVR – my forms contain principles for combat. They contain ideas. My forms contain ideas for developing power, for developing mobility while maintaining root. My forms contain the idea of the centerline, of economy of movement, of the changes possible. They develop a calmness to be transposed over into fighting. My forms have ideas for attack and defense. My pole form has the idea for attack and for defense. My forms have ideas and they have the techniques and tools.

**All those things come from either developing the tool (contained in the form) or from application, from seeing how to best use the tool. You are "reading" them into the form after the fact. Show an absolute beginner the "form" and they won't be able to tell you the "ideas"; all they see are movements. The "ideas" behind those movements come either from someone else (they tell you what they mean, or more accurately, what they think they mean) or from your own experience. If they come from someone else, they need to be validated from experience (fighting) as what they think they mean may not be fully accurate. This is why I say that you don't learn to fight from the forms, you "learn" the forms (the ideas behind them) from fighting.

RVR – there are more ways to teach a beginner than to have them pound each other out to learn the hard way how to fight. I guess you don’t have experience to teach different kinds of people? Our beginners learn the form, learn applications, learn drills, ask questions and fight. That’s what they do. Your beginners just suit up and fight. Two different ways to teach. The latter way is of course the easier way to teach. You don’t need to do anything. No forms, no drills, no explanations. Just fight. All learning comes from fighting. If your not fighting your wasting your time.

**The trouble with the "what if" questions is that they don't take the nature of fighting into account and so any answer will be incomplete, a poor answer (it may be a good answer for demos but not fighting). You can't look at it from the perspective of "how do I deal with a thai kick" because there are too many variables to give a good answer. For example, what is the distance, what are the relative reaches, relative speeds, relative strenghts, how are we standing in relation to each other, are we breaking contact, am I entering, what else is going on, what have I just done, etc. Depending on the answer to these and other questions, I may need to respond differently (in demos, you don't have to deal with this). And equally importantly, good fighters don't just let you get ready and set and then throw a thai kick, but set you up, get you to move, get you to do something, feint or fake, use it in combinations, get you to shift your weight, misjudge your distance, etc. So if your "answer" is to front kick, for example, but he gets you to shift your weight forward or step or some other way commit your leg, then you won't have it available to kick (in demos you don't have to deal wtih this). One should *begin* from how that person moves during fighting (that's the starting point we should work from rather than making the person confrom to how we think they should move or respond) -- we all have our own idiosyncratic way of moving. That is the base from which to begin "adding" responses: you work from the clay (the individual make-up). It won't help someone to tell them to answer the thai kick such-and-such a way if that doesn't fit into their individual, natural movement in fighting (of course, this assumes you are fighting so as to see what that is; in demos you don't have to deal with this). This is why we need to progressively add each tool into their fighting and fight from the beginning -- this allows the student to individualize the method for himself from the very beginning, which is necessary since every additional piece will "fit" (be adapted) into that individualized approach.

Regards,

Terence

[Redd]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
vankuen wrote:

Funny how people complain about the what if's...when the only person that what if'd posted just before me, and it was in jest. I could see someone complain if it was happening...but cmon people....the magazines are full of this stuff...but do you stop buying the magazines because of it? Give it a rest. If you don't want to see the what if's ....don't read the thread. Period.

**I'm always surprised by the "solid reasoning" behind so many of these posts -- here's another example of "if it is widespread it must be good" thinking. What that really says is "I don't know what I'm talking about, but lots of others do the same thing, so it can't be bad." Brilliant. Just brilliant.

**And then it's topped off with that common retort used by all those that lack the ability to intelligently defend their "beliefs": "I don't want to hear dissenting views, go away." Brilliant. Just Brilliant.

Terence

A poor track record for mind reading and a high insult ratio.

[t_niehoff]

Redd,

I don't claim to be a mindreader, and my "insults" are directed at the "reasoning methods" cited , not the person. But I understand that some may have difficulty making that distinction -- but a criticism of their argument (or training method) is not a personal attack. And btw, I noticed you didn't mention your support of vankuen's "reasoning".

On a related note, one common theme I see reoccur in many forms is the question of "why do I keep bringing up fighting?" And I wonder when I see that if the thinking is "let's stop all this talk about fighting and get back to discussing WCK"!? From my perspective, I don't see how we can separate the two; how can you separate learning to swim from swimming itself? How can you separate the training method (getting in the pool) from the activity itself? It seems to me that if we are not talking about fighting or training to fight, we are not talking about WCK.

You cited my intentionally provocative statement about CXW -- which I used to underscore of my point that you can't become a significantly better fighter without fighting (and CXW hasn't fought) -- as your tagline. I wonder why? To say something? About yourself? About me? Why don't you use this one instead: Randy Couture would kick my @ss. He's a fighter. Trains to fight by fighting. Has fought highly skilled people (and has even lost). But he has *demonstrated* world-class fighting skill. I wonder why anyone would think Couture could fight and CXW can't? ;)

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

**Everytime I hear the term "principle-based system" it makes my @ss twitch -- it's just another often repeated myth, especially one theoreticians love. The term is meaningless. Sure WCK has principles, so does many other fighting methods.

RVR: I guess you don’t understand the concept then. Some systems are techniques based like Kenpo, one technique for every kind of attack. That’s your kind of system I guess. Wing Chun is just some good ideas from the Southern Chinese fighting arts plus a minimal tool set to implement these ideas. That’s it. Wing Chun is very simple. The ideas are encoded in the forms. The forms are not application choreographies. They are just roadmaps to fighting for the teacher to explain to students by means of training procedures and then fighting. Most fighting methods have principles. The principles from Wing Chun come from other fighting systems. Where do you think they come from?

**There is nothing wrong with articles, they have their place. But discussions of "use X to defeat Y" aren't useful. See below.

RVR: Funny that the Gracies, your heroes, spend so much time talking about how this and that technique can be used to counter this or that other technique.

**I said you don't begin with "theory"; you do begin with the tools as I said before. See below.

RVR: You might not begin with theory but other people do. If you want to develop an atomic bomb you don’t start with firecrackers. You start with a theory for how that might work. To fight the Thais you can start with a theory that conditioning and learning their trade would be the roadmap to defeating them. You don’t have to get your limbs broken first and then say : “oh, maybe I need some ideas first.” Wing Chun starts with a theory. The theory is one of economy of action implemented by use of the centerline theory. The whole system can develop from there. It doesn’t help to start with 10,000 martial arts tools and then wonder what to trim away. The overall strategy determines the tools.

**You keep mocking my postition with "real fighters don't do this or that" or "you're a wimp" and so forth. That sort of thing just displays intellectual bankruptcy -- it's a rather common form of a fallacious argument and when you see it you know that it is the "last resort" of someone that can't marshall a sound, rational argument. In other words, it is the cry of someone acknowledging defeat but feeling the need to say something.

RVR: Terence I never said you’re a wimp. I don’t believe you are that. Your obviously very tough. Your posts actually indicate intellectual bankruptcy because your posts say only that real fighters fight. No matter what the subject matter of the thread might be. That’s it. Fighters fight. Brilliant. There isn’t one useful suggestion., no experiences posted, no video clips no evidence that what you do is better than what anyone else does. Your keyboard has been wired to just punch out: “fighters fights and most Wing Chun people are dry land swimmers.” You thought those were very catchy lines right? Ok, you did mention that you might try a punch against a low roundhouse kick so I give you credit for that.

**First you get a tool, develop the tool, then put it into fighting. In trying to use that tool in fighting (and become more successful in application), one will find the principles.

RVR: I have always said that as well. MY way is to explain to new people the idea of Wing Chun. Then they can take it or leave it at that point. Then we develop the tools. Then we apply it in fighting. In your approach you just leave off step 1 to explain to students what it is they will be learning. I like to know the concept before I dive in.

**What you fail to see is that the very question, or rather the need to ask that question, indicates a failure in >how< they are training in the first place -- in their approach. See below.

RVR: I believe the scientific method is to ask questions. There are no stupid questions. You don’t have to be afraid to ask questions because some bully will laugh at you. Real people try things, have problems and then they ask questions from those who have succeeded to solve similar problems AND who are helpful. Most people on this thread are in the helpful category and not in the fools category as you suggest.

** This is why I say that you don't learn to fight from the forms, you "learn" the forms (the ideas behind them) from fighting.

RVR: This is a chicken and egg thing. What came first, fighting or the form? I haven’t seen any brawler come up with a form yet. The Wing Chun form is a theoretical exposition about fighting which must be translated by the teacher into fighting application, drills and ideas for the student. It’s just a textbook. Some people like textbooks and can learn that way and other people hate books and must learn from practical experience. The book readers also get practical experience but they like to read the theory first. Some people try to cure a disease by eating all kinds of drugs. Some people try to understand the causes first to come up with a possible treatment based on a theory.

** You can't look at it from the perspective of "how do I deal with a Thai kick" because there are too many variables to give a good answer. For example, …

RVR: This section of yours is good because you actually say something. However that’s not at odds with what anyone else has said on this thread. Various people have given their ideas to try. These can be starting points for the students to try and then he will discover through drilling and through fighting when and where those ideas will work or won’t work. When you go to any seminar they show you stuff. Then you go home with some new tools and ideas and try them out. It saves wasting a lot of time re-inventing the wheel. It’s smarter not to re-invent the wheel each time and to learn from what other experienced fighters have discovered. Sure I could come with the whole Gracie system myself from my wrestling and Wing Chun background but it’s a lot smarter to listen to those guys first, then try it out to develop my own ideas according to my strengths and weaknesses.

[t_niehoff]

**Fighting methods begin with fighting and evolve based on experience. The whole technique-based/concept-based notion is nonsense IMO, like the internal/external notion. Labels like these don't explain what is really going on.

RVR: Funny that the Gracies, your heroes, spend so much time talking about how this and that technique can be used to counter this or that other technique.

**You need to understand the context.

RVR: You might not begin with theory but other people do. If you want to develop an atomic bomb you don’t start with firecrackers. You start with a theory for how that might work. To fight the Thais you can start with a theory that conditioning and learning their trade would be the roadmap to defeating them. You don’t have to get your limbs broken first and then say : “oh, maybe I need some ideas first.” Wing Chun starts with a theory. The theory is one of economy of action implemented by use of the centerline theory. The whole system can develop from there. It doesn’t help to start with 10,000 martial arts tools and then wonder what to trim away. The overall strategy determines the tools.

**You are correct that the strategy determines the tools (as we use them to implement the strategy). The strategy isn't a concept -- it is *approach* (the BJJ strategy of taking the opponent to the ground, getting superior position, and then going for submission is approach). Having the strategic approach, we then begin to try to implement it with our tools (various tools to take him to the ground, pass the guard, pin, then submit). The concepts come in later. See below for further elaboration.

**You keep mocking my postition with "real fighters don't do this or that" or "you're a wimp" and so forth. That sort of thing just displays intellectual bankruptcy -- it's a rather common form of a fallacious argument and when you see it you know that it is the "last resort" of someone that can't marshall a sound, rational argument. In other words, it is the cry of someone acknowledging defeat but feeling the need to say something.

RVR: Terence I never said you’re a wimp. I don’t believe you are that. Your obviously very tough. Your posts actually indicate intellectual bankruptcy because your posts say only that real fighters fight. No matter what the subject matter of the thread might be. That’s it. Fighters fight. Brilliant. There isn’t one useful suggestion., no experiences posted, no video clips no evidence that what you do is better than what anyone else does. Your keyboard has been wired to just punch out: “fighters fights and most Wing Chun people are dry land swimmers.” You thought those were very catchy lines right? Ok, you did mention that you might try a punch against a low roundhouse kick so I give you credit for that.

**Please reread my comment. Your remarks suggested that I thought everyone else was a wimp if they didn't fight. That's not the case, and you know that but want to redicule my position. There is only one good way to know anything -- from evidence, from results. It doesn't matter if I fight better than anyone else -- my point isn't based on personal authority ("believe me because I'm good" -- that's a recipe for disaster). Rather, I'm saying anyone can and should look critically at their own "progress", their own "results", for themselves and see if their training methods are working, that is producing good results. Not results in drills or forms but results in what we are training to do: fight. Obviously one can't determine results, and the progress of those results, absent fighting. So if one trains 5 years without ever fighitng (to learn the "whole system" first, for example), they will be punching for 5 years without ever getting any feedback on their results -- so they won't be able to make any changes to their punching to get better results for 5 years.

**Moreover, if we look at the evidence of what sort of training produces good fighters, the evidence overwhelmingly shows us again and again that those folks who have proven that their training has significantly increased their fighting skills (regardless of their method) do not follow the sort of training model that most WCK people do -- instead it's the sort I've outlined in my previous posts. Now you can pronoounce that there are lots of ways to increase fighting skill (the many roads to Rome position), and point to "stories" or to people that don't fight that you infer have fighting skill from their drill or demo performances, but I don't see anyone that has demonstrated significantly increased fighting skills using one of these "other ways" (none of them have gotten to Rome).

RVR: I have always said that as well. MY way is to explain to new people the idea of Wing Chun. Then they can take it or leave it at that point. Then we develop the tools. Then we apply it in fighting. In your approach you just leave off step 1 to explain to students what it is they will be learning. I like to know the concept before I dive in.

**I, too, begin with approach, the method of WCK. I don't call that a concept, rather it is a direction or a roadmap. A concept is some notion that helps us use the tools to their fullest. Lien siu die da is a concept. It is not the method or approach of WCK. However, it helps us use the tools to their fullest (which helps us implement the method). That concept, for example, is best understood from application; if you simply try and use the punch -- just the punch -- in fighting, you'll find lien siu die da yourself as it is a natural consequence of using the tool in application, no one will need to point it out to you. This is IME what a good instructor does: he leads or guides the student through the self-discovery of these things.

RVR: I believe the scientific method is to ask questions. There are no stupid questions. You don’t have to be afraid to ask questions because some bully will laugh at you. Real people try things, have problems and then they ask questions from those who have succeeded to solve similar problems AND who are helpful. Most people on this thread are in the helpful category and not in the fools category as you suggest.

**I'm not suggesting anyone is a fool, just that they are approaching the "problem" from the wrong direction.

** This is why I say that you don't learn to fight from the forms, you "learn" the forms (the ideas behind them) from fighting.

RVR: This is a chicken and egg thing. What came first, fighting or the form?

**That's like asking which came first, printing or reading? They go together; you can't have one without the other.

I haven’t seen any brawler come up with a form yet.

**Any motion/action has "form." What you refer to is "form" that what you think their "form" should *look* like. "Form" is actually a poor word choice IMO as it implies something static or fixed. What is the "form" of someone throwing a ball or doing any action? You gauge or judge it based on performance or function. A good WCK punch produces certain results -- if it "looks" good but doesn't produce those results, it sucks. And it can't produce those results absent "form" as the "form" is a product of that result/function.

The Wing Chun form is a theoretical exposition about fighting which must be translated by the teacher into fighting application, drills and ideas for the student. It’s just a textbook. Some people like textbooks and can learn that way and other people hate books and must learn from practical experience. The book readers also get practical experience but they like to read the theory first. Some people try to cure a disease by eating all kinds of drugs. Some people try to understand the causes first to come up with a possible treatment based on a theory.

**The textbook analogy is fine. And it's the same for any martial art, they all have "techniques" or "forms" too. The issue is how does someone take that tool and make it work for themselves? And BTW, good instructors in any subject aren't bound by the textbook, and the textbook is merely a tool that serves us in developing skill and understanding of the subject matter (the fighting method in this case). A textbook on swimming isn't the same as swimming.

** You can't look at it from the perspective of "how do I deal with a Thai kick" because there are too many variables to give a good answer. For example, …

RVR: This section of yours is good because you actually say something. However that’s not at odds with what anyone else has said on this thread. Various people have given their ideas to try. These can be starting points for the students to try and then he will discover through drilling and through fighting when and where those ideas will work or won’t work. When you go to any seminar they show you stuff. Then you go home with some new tools and ideas and try them out. It saves wasting a lot of time re-inventing the wheel. It’s smarter not to re-invent the wheel each time and to learn from what other experienced fighters have discovered.

**Of course that begs the question of are these "suggestions" made by "experienced fighters" (and if not, should they be listened to?). And if their suggestions are so good, let's see them use them against good thai fighters (or is it the case of "theoretically this should work"?). But I think you're missing the brunt of my point, which is that the answers to these "what-if" questions will be answered from the course of training if one is training "properly"; if one is not training properly, which explains why these questions arise if the first place, no answer will be of much use -- they can go back and put it into a poor training model but they still won't "get it."

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

**Of course that begs the question of are these "suggestions" made by "experienced fighters" (and if not, should they be listened to?). And if their suggestions are so good, let's see them use them against good Thai fighters (or is it the case of "theoretically this should work"?). But I think you're missing the brunt of my point, which is that the answers to these "what-if" questions will be answered from the course of training if one is training "properly"; if one is not training properly, which explains why these questions arise if the first place, no answer will be of much use -- they can go back and put it into a poor training model but they still won't "get it."

Regards,

Terence

Hi Terence,

RVR:
Your post wasn't too bad. I think the problem with your posts is not your ideas but just that you appear to be very condescending and try to use bully tactics, which don't work over the net. With an impolite tone, no one will listen to you and people will argue just for the sake of argument even if you might be right. You also never show any results from your camp as others like Ernie and Phil have. They expose themselves for all to see. Of course against the real Thais, who’s willing to risk that? None of the Wing Chun teachers are willing to do that because they have everything to lose and nothing much to gain. Most are hobbyists and not professional fighters. In the case of Yip Man, he had to teach to earn some money otherwise Wing Chun may have died.

You talk pretty tough and say everyone should see if their stuff works against the Thais and that's great. I also want to see if your approach or anyone else's approach works against the Thais. I would like to see whose approach works best against the Thais, the traditional approach of William Cheung, the non-traditional approach of Wong Shun Leung and Leung Ting or the non Yip Man approach of Robert Chu. Is there anyone in your whole lineage that can give them a run for their money?

Maybe your approach is better but using your criteria of fighting against the Thais, it may also be not good enough. Phil has posted some video clips of handling a roundhouse kick. It's a William Cheung type of approach that people can try. I have no idea if that really works against the Thais. Probably it will work against non-Thais or against the people at your club. It looks reasonable.

Phil presented a visual theory. Now put that against a kicker who kicks at speed N meters per second and slowly increase the speed and at some point that method might break down. Is there a better method that wouldn't fail as soon? Then start the kick of at force N pounds per square inch. Then slowly increase the force. At some point in time, that method may fail as well. Perhaps someone can argue that his method will always work. Will the Kwun sau against a high roundhouse work? From my experience against average kickers it seems to work fine. I saw Chung Kwok Chow use that against a good Korean kicker in a demo. I didn’t see him apply it in a freestyle sparring match. Does it work against the Thai's in a lab situation, not even in a fight, who knows? Do you? If you did then that would be great to report.

Phil said he applied it against good kickers so that inspires one to try the idea. After that it put it into the fighting mix. As you say fighting is different because there are so many variables. You may never be in the position to apply that particular technique and have to apply on of the other 20 ideas you have as part of your tool set. Also the kicker may not be in a position to deliver the kick because he is too far or too close or too off-balance. This gives another idea to play with the distance and the timing no matter what the contact shape.

Overall in a fight I have heard of Wing Chun people on the rare occasion being able to handle a Thai boxer. I have never seen this and maybe it was never against anyone good and never on a repeatable basis. Various Wing Chun people might be able to beat a lot of average boxers but never the top contenders. Maybe we can beat a lot of BJJ artists but not the top guys. What is the fine line where that matters or doesn't matter?

You might train hard with your own club members but that might be soft in comparison to some members from some other club. I think people tend to train as hard as they can, stopping just short of injury. We do that. For us we go as fast as we can control, the same as when you drive a car. Then we try to work on trying to control ourselves at higher and higher levels of speed and strength. Slowly we build up our repertoire while doing this. Sometimes the whole experiment comes to a halt when certain students quit. So then you start over again and can't really continue from where you left off.

Sometimes fighters from some kind of other school might send us back to the drawing board and that fighter might come from Wing Chun, from boxing, from BJJ or from classical arts like Preying Mantis, Tai Chi or Hung style. If you never meet a certain type of fighter then you may never become aware of a weakness in your game plan. That kind of thing happens in Chess all the time. An opening might be considered sound for decades and then someone refutes it. Then again maybe a deeper analyst can again make it work against the counter tactics.

Theory and practice go hand in hand. You can figure out a lot of things from theory too. When Wong Shun Leung visited us one year we had lot's of debate with him. He didn't mind; he loved it. At one point he said "where did you learn that, who told you that, was it Wang Kiu?" We said no we just thought it up. The brain can do marvelous things.

On the theory approach, my wrestling friend in high school was also the provincial shot-put champion. That was also my event. With the 12 pound shot-put he threw 46 feet and I could only throw 42 no matter what I did. So then I went over and over again in my mind what he was doing. I got out a piece of paper and analyzed the whole physics of it and came up with an idea. So then I went out into the field with my shot-put and within a couple of throws, using my new body mechanics model, I managed to throw 48 feet. I invited my friend over and I out threw him. A few weeks later was the actual city school meet against all schools. We both entered the event. But he again was the champion because he always excelled under pressure. I fell short. He set a new record of about 49 feet. I threw about 46 feet. At home in relaxed mode I could throw 48.

I think the same happens in a lot of Olympic events. Everyone looks like they are unbeatable. Then someone goes back to the drawing board with a theory of how to improve. Often it isn't training harder because all the athletes already train as hard as they can train. Instead it's a new idea, a new angle, maybe a new training method.

I like to figure out the theory and then try it out. For me I was attracted to the Wing Chun theory and effectiveness when I was playing their game. Other arts never seemed to have any theory or at least never taught a theory. Fighting was by trial and error. Eventually you also came up with methods that worked. On my path, I thought the Wing Chun training program suddenly feel short when it got to the Thai kickboxing matches, the MMA matches, against 7th degree black belt kickers like Huang Jiang Lee.

The Chinese realized this. Maybe their programs were OK but the government suppressed realistic combat. But with heavy defeats by the Thais there was a loss of face. The SanDa effort seems to have been started up as a quick fix to the problem. Thousands of years of stuff got dumped into the garbage apparently and now everything has to be rethought. What I see for the most part is a drift towards the sporting, ring art side of the martial arts. If that were applied to Aikido then their 3,000 techniques would be have to be thrown away. I suspect a lot of Tai Chi, Ba Gua and things from any other classical art would also hit the wayside. I think it would be a pity to have that happen. To me it would be like ending up with only popular piano players who no matter how good are just not in the class of people like Mozart.

[old jong]

We should change this question for "How do we stop the "tefal" frying pan?...Because my wife once hittted me with one of these things (where the back looses it's name)and it hurted as hell!...;)

[Edmund]

If his foot is aimed at your thigh and you want your elbow to hit it,
you must have arms like an orangutan!:)


Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun

In the example I gave wherein it ends in a leg-catch...I would be going for it if he's kicking with his right leg as an attack against the back of my left thigh or knee area...and the hammerfist is tight near my body...with a very slight step back and to my right with my right foot...immediately preceding lifting my left leg.

..
..
..
The elbow of the hammerfist is down and in close to my body (often I've found that while my hammer "fist" hit's just below his knee by his upper shin area - my elbow is simultaneously hitting his ankle/foot area.

[Edmund]

Originally posted by YongChun
[BThe Chinese realized this. Maybe their programs were OK but the government suppressed realistic combat. But with heavy defeats by the Thais there was a loss of face. The SanDa effort seems to have been started up as a quick fix to the problem. Thousands of years of stuff got dumped into the garbage apparently and now everything has to be rethought. What I see for the most part is a drift towards the sporting, ring art side of the martial arts. If that were applied to Aikido then their 3,000 techniques would be have to be thrown away. I suspect a lot of Tai Chi, Ba Gua and things from any other classical art would also hit the wayside. I think it would be a pity to have that happen. To me it would be like ending up with only popular piano players who no matter how good are just not in the class of people like Mozart. [/B]

Who did Mozart ever beat in a genuine piano fight?

Seriously though, classical arts such as Aikido, Taiji, Bagua are doing pretty good without doing any realistic combat. I wouldn't worry too much about them disappearing.

[SAAMAG]

I think this thread is getting to be more of an ego trip for a couple of guys (names withheld for obvious reasons) who feel that they must prove themselves to the internet audience.

All I was saying...was that if you don't like what you read, why read it? It seems that some people bad mouth threads like this, but thrive to come in here every day and say something about it. "Brilliant. Just Brilliant." I think that about sums it up.

[Mr Punch]

Cheers Victor, sounds reasonable. You'd have to be fast to catch the kick tho. I prefer using your rising leg to unbalance him, followed by whatever strike combo you're using from the bounce off his leg, as he goes backwards. If with your step back, you've dropped into a strong stance you can raise your leg under his and send him on his way, using your leg raise to follow through into a stamping kick as you land.

I've used this against good kickers but no Thai guys as yet, as far as I remember.

What about a low one tho as per the original question?

Again, I like a stop kick, and the higher the kick, the closer I want my bridge, so the more likely I am to turn into a tan gerk.

[canglong]

YongChun,
Do you defend against the kick or do you defend the gate?

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Phil!!
Hope everything is going well.

I just saw the clips you posted on page 3 of this thread and I'm not sure if the first set of clips would work against a really good kicker. The guys (from what I saw) were blocking the kick with their hands and I gotta say that seems like a big risk to me. I use to kick box where Jean-Yves Theriault use to train and I'll tell ya that dude could kick. He's was a pro so that's unfair but there are a lot of good kickers out there and I don't think hands could cut it.

The kwan sau clip could be effective if you could time it so that both forearms make contact at the same time. But again it could lead to a break in your arm.

When I was in the ring I use to do a lot of front thrust kicks to the stomach when someone tried a round house.

Not saying that they won't work, just sharing my experience.

J

[SAAMAG]

When I was thaiboxing full time a few years back, I remember most of the blocking of the oncoming thai kicks with either raising the leg, or dropping the elbow, or simply absorbing the kick.

Now given the fact we were conditioned for this it didn't seem like a big deal. I was thinking about how everyone was saying that blocking with a wing chun technique against a strong kick would break the arm. Well quite frankly blocking any kick that strong would likely break the arm no matter what the form, if you put it that way. Thinking back, whenever I fought guys I found had exceptionally strong kicks, I tried to use footwork to move around them, either stopping their kicks before they happened, or simply manuvering to let the kick sail by.

Just something else to chew on.

[Jeff Bussey]

Hi VanKuen

Actually ya you make a good point, now that I think about it, I use to absorb the kicks alot and as I recall, if the guys shins weren't that conditioned, sometimes you can hit their shin with your elbow.
Some may think that's a dirty trick and it probably is but it works :D

J

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by Jeff Bussey
Hey Phil!!
Hope everything is going well.

I just saw the clips you posted on page 3 of this thread and I'm not sure if the first set of clips would work against a really good kicker. The guys (from what I saw) were blocking the kick with their hands and I gotta say that seems like a big risk to me. I use to kick box where Jean-Yves Theriault use to train and I'll tell ya that dude could kick. He's was a pro so that's unfair but there are a lot of good kickers out there and I don't think hands could cut it.

The kwan sau clip could be effective if you could time it so that both forearms make contact at the same time. But again it could lead to a break in your arm.

When I was in the ring I use to do a lot of front thrust kicks to the stomach when someone tried a round house.

Not saying that they won't work, just sharing my experience.

J

I appreciate your experience, but all of those will work if trained properly. The double block with the hands will work if your are moving with the kick. The key is to attempt to pull the leg down and away for the kicker's center of gravity so that he can't throw another kick. I also kick boxed and trained with the US Champ Yoel Judah http://www.braggingrightscorner.com/yjudah.html
His son is Zab Judah (http://www.boxinggurus.com/judahz.html So I'm speaking from my kicking boxing experience as well. Also, in the Fu Jow Pai matches knees elbows and take downs were legal.
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

How are you doing Jeff? I will make it to capital city next year God willing.
Phil

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Phil,
I'm Doing great. Got married in May and now we're expecting a baby girl in March :p
I'm trying to think of some drills that I can use her in like maybe balancing her on one of my head while I do chum kiu or something to that effect.
Hope everything is going well with you.

So like I said about the techniques, anything can work.

J

[YongChun]

Originally posted by canglong
YongChun,
Do you defend against the kick or do you defend the gate?

I would say the gate as my first answer. But sometimes you might need to know something about the attack detail to adjust the approach. For example in escrima a number #1 strike to your left temple and a #6 poke to your left eye are both the same gate but the angle the stick come in at is a little different so you might have to adjust your position a little although your stick angle for defense might be the same. With kicks a round kick and a hook kick can come to the same gate. If your position is wrong handling the hook kick say with a knee lift then the kick could change to a spinal hook kick or he could do one of those SanDa double leg scissors takedowns.

Ray

[Ultimatewingchun]

"If his foot is aimed at your thigh and you want your elbow to hit it, you must have arms like an orangutan!"
(Edmund)

"Cheers Victor, sounds reasonable. You'd have to be fast to catch the kick tho. I prefer using your rising leg to unbalance him...What about a low one tho as per the original question?"
(Mat)

Firstly - it's the hammer fist that does the strike - the elbow coming into play is only if he's kicking slightly higher...otherwise - it's just the fist that strikes his leg.

Secondly - The rising leg is the key - and sometimes that results in actually making his kick rise up slightly as well...making it vulnerable to the hammerfist and grab...but if he's kicking very low then just the rising leg will do to absorb.

[canglong]

I would say the gate as my first answer. But sometimes you might need to know something about the attack detail to adjust the approach. 1. good answer YongChun. 2. The "approach" as you put it are concepts and principles that define how humans interact with Energy. These energies can come in different forms such as people, sound, visions, heat, cold, water, light, the smell of fresh cut flowers, noise of a jackhammer or thia roundhouse kicks this is why the six gates of wing chun are analogous to the six senses of the human body they seperate the boundries of reality from illusion. This reality as expressed by the shaolin monks that created and passed on this awareness in the form of the methodology in the Wing Chun System is a thai roundhouse kick is just another form of communication we as human can express and accept or reject provided we have enough self awareness to seperate the reality of the situation from the illusion.

YongChun you have six gates and more time and energy than anyone else I know good luck in your use of them all.

[YongChun]

I am not of the William Cheung lineage but I think their facing stance makes Phil's defense against the roundhouse much more feasible than if some other Wing Chun facing position was used.

Ray

[Vajramusti]

Ray- How do you know this?
BTW- I have mentioned this before-- by the time one identifies a kick asa round house kick- aginst a good person it is already too late IMO. That method has a technique against technique character to it. Different cups of tea. Darjeeling- golden orange pekoe will do.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
Ray- How do you know this?
BTW- I have mentioned this before-- by the time one identifies a kick asa round house kick- aginst a good person it is already too late IMO. That method has a technique against technique character to it. Different cups of tea. Darjeeling- golden orange pekoe will do.

I just threw that out for discussion and am not talking about application against those guys in that Thai video clip I posted. I was just comparing say a front facing forward stance and then try to do Phil's movement and the footing would be awkward maybe the same for the SLT pigeon toe position. From my experience you can't see half the kicks from a good kicker but you can sure feel them. Against slow kicks, lots of nice things work. I don't want to say too much because anything can be picked apart too easily even by me. The bigger the word count, the bigger the target.

Ray

[Ultimatewingchun]

"By the time one identifies a kick as a round house kick- against a good person it is already too late ."

Speak for yourself... As I've mentioned numerous times (and you, Joy, always reject the notion out of hand)...the method that William Cheung's TWC employs of watching elbows and knees will telegragh what's coming if employed with diligence.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"By the time one identifies a kick as a round house kick- against a good person it is already too late ."

Speak for yourself... As I've mentioned numerous times (and you, Joy, always reject the notion out of hand)...the method that William Cheung's TWC employs of watching elbows and knees will telegragh what's coming if employed with diligence.

ahh but can you read a savate kick that has no knee chamber and is set up with the hands

fires from the hip and changes direction and elevation in mid air or on contact


so there :D :D :D http://www.guychase.com/p4.html

[Vajramusti]

Victor sez:

Speak for yourself...

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

Of course- who else can I be?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ernie:

If by set up by the hands you mean a faking motion...then switching the vision from the elbow of the arm that was faking to the knee of the kicking leg can still be done - because even without a chambered kick the scanning process that accompanies watching the elbow of an arm that "appears" to be attacking will still allow for the knee of the kicking leg (whether chambered or not ) to come into the line of peripheral and then direct sight.

Also keep in mind that at certain longer distances the direct focus of the eyes is on the knees...looking at the elbow(s) coming into play as you get closer...and at other times the direct vision is placed at a midpoint of the body wherein both elbows and knees can be monitored with peripheral vision - to be switched to direct vision on one particular elbow or knee as the fight develops.

"fires from the hip and changes direction and elevation in mid air or on contact "...

One of the reasons why the focus on the knee is so important is precisely because of the reason you gave...blocking near or directly at his knee joint area makes it extremely hard for him to change direction or elevation in mid air upon contact - because attacking his knee joint area in this manner will seriously affect his balance.

[sihing]

I agree with Victor, once the foot leaves the ground the knee has to move, whether or not he chambers it. Even in those pictures on that website that Ernie supplied of Savate, they chambered their knees for most of them. For a high lead round kick we like to attack the knee before the leg is fully extended. The knee has to first rise to the proper height and while this is happening the leg is being extended, deflecting at the knee snuff's the kick out before it can complete. We also step into it but to the side, therefore catching it before it is even close to its apex. The pak would attack the knee while a tan sao side step would protect the upper gate if it happened to slide through. For low kicks we like to circle step into the knee, not the shin, all the while attacking upstairs. For rear kicks of any height, the same can be used but because of the extra distance needed to travel from the rear you can always side step and stop kick/hit to intercept it. The knees and elbows are the best things to deflect as these are balance points on the body and are easier to see and find IMO.

James

[YongChun]

Anyone try fighting Bill Wallace with his standard knee up position pose from where he fires of his four basic kicks?

http://www.fightingmaster.com/legends/wallace/

[Edmund]

I agree with Ray.

Due to the speed of kicks, you'd have a tough time using both hands to contact the leg if you are facing square to the front.





Originally posted by YongChun
I just threw that out for discussion and am not talking about application against those guys in that Thai video clip I posted. I was just comparing say a front facing forward stance and then try to do Phil's movement and the footing would be awkward maybe the same for the SLT pigeon toe position. From my experience you can't see half the kicks from a good kicker but you can sure feel them. Against slow kicks, lots of nice things work. I don't want to say too much because anything can be picked apart too easily even by me. The bigger the word count, the bigger the target.

Ray

[sihing]

Taking nothing away from Wallace, my Sifu patterned some of his kicking repetororie from him, but if you put your body in contact with his ****ed leg, how much power do you think he would have to kick you with? None. You would jam his technique. The problem was the kickboxers fight at a certain range, different from the range a trapper or grappler would fight at, so Wallace's kicks worked good if you stayed out there for him to kick you with. Enter, jam and fight him at a closer range to which his kicks are rendered useless, that would be the key to fighting a Wallace type of fighter, or Thai in this case.

James

[Ernie]

victor , james

i was being playful
but in all honesty spar a savate guy and get back to me :)

trust me they are the most elusive kickers you will ever see

it's a very rare art and requires a serious amount of hip flexibility
when I was practicing it and sparred the Thai guys the affectionately named me noodle leg because the could never catch the trajectory of my kicks and I was never that good at it


it's a whole different ball game when your in front of one of those guys

as for the leg it chambers on recoil not the intiial attack . it's not the stills it's the motion


research danial duby find video of him

[sihing]

Elusive...I'll research it and report back later... No disrespect here Ernie, but why is it when someone comes back with logic, like watching and attacking the knee or elbow, you come back with "elusive". And then when someone is being "elusive" in context you come back with logic??? Someone can be as elusive as they want when they kick or punch, just try doing it without moving the knee or elbow....move your knee I attack it, move your elbow I attack it. They have proven for fact that both of these move slower than fist or foot....

James

[anerlich]

Enter, jam and fight him at a closer range to which his kicks are rendered useless, that would be the key to fighting a Wallace type of fighter, or Thai in this case.

True, I guess, though Bill W had reasonable boxing hands as well, and if you get inside the range of a good MT guy's kicks, you have some very nasty, knees, elbows and a solid standing clinch game to contend with.

Ernie, these guys:

www.savateaustralia.com.au

are pretty good at their stuff too. Plus they have good hands and wrestling.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by sihing
No disrespect here Ernie, but why is it when someone comes back with logic, like watching and attacking the knee or elbow, you come back with "elusive". And then when someone is being "elusive" in context you come back with logic???
James

That's a good martial arts tactic. Use the opposite of what your opponent does. If he is hard, you go soft. If he is soft you go hard. If he is jumpy you remain calm. If he is calm then fluster him with jumpy. If he uses straight you use curved and if he uses curved, you use straight. Etc.

Ray

[sihing]

Ray, Bewilder them to defeat...

Yes Andrew I would imagine Wallace as a pro kickboxer would have a solid punching game too, better be if he was pro and fulltime at it.....I met him once at a kickboxing/seminar event, and got a cool pik of us doing the splits, but I must warn he is a jokester....lol

James

[namron]

Originally posted by anerlich
True, I guess, though Bill W had reasonable boxing hands as well, and if you get inside the range of a good MT guy's kicks, you have some very nasty, knees, elbows and a solid standing clinch game to contend with.



Got agree with that one and dont try to duck outa the neck clinch too often unless you like a knee TKO.

Personally I think most thai guys are more than happy in the clinch and exchange (to coin a twc term) ranges, and a lot of them are walk up fighters that are constantly reducing the range.

Bill I imagine has a who range of tactics.

[Ernie]

Originally posted by sihing
Elusive...I'll research it and report back later... No disrespect here Ernie, but why is it when someone comes back with logic, like watching and attacking the knee or elbow, you come back with "elusive". And then when someone is being "elusive" in context you come back with logic??? Someone can be as elusive as they want when they kick or punch, just try doing it without moving the knee or elbow....move your knee I attack it, move your elbow I attack it. They have proven for fact that both of these move slower than fist or foot....

James

ha ha man people are not machines they make mistakes no matter how '' logical '' they think they are it is only a concept

things change in real life

i was like you , had the '' text book '' wing chun answer for everything , and then i got in the ring and went out and started to really do my own research

things change my friend , good fighters pick up on human error and patterns and [ the way ] and use it against you :D


Anerlich
Ernie, these guys:

www.savateaustralia.com.au

are pretty good at their stuff too. Plus they have good hands and wrestling

---- oh yea and there great at take downs from the clinch but there best at staying in long range and just picking you apart
there foot work is just amazing , there some of the fastest fighters i have ever seen

now don't get Savate mixed up with the sport version box francaise

one is the old street version one is the flashy ring version http://www.bridgemansavate.com/html/history.htm

anerlich have you messed with these cats yet

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by sihing
I agree with Victor, once the foot leaves the ground the knee has to move, whether or not he chambers it. Even in those pictures on that website that Ernie supplied of Savate, they chambered their knees for most of them. For a high lead round kick we like to attack the knee before the leg is fully extended. The knee has to first rise to the proper height and while this is happening the leg is being extended, deflecting at the knee snuff's the kick out before it can complete. We also step into it but to the side, therefore catching it before it is even close to its apex. The pak would attack the knee while a tan sao side step would protect the upper gate if it happened to slide through. For low kicks we like to circle step into the knee, not the shin, all the while attacking upstairs. For rear kicks of any height, the same can be used but because of the extra distance needed to travel from the rear you can always side step and stop kick/hit to intercept it. The knees and elbows are the best things to deflect as these are balance points on the body and are easier to see and find IMO.

James

if you miss the knee, you get kicked. why go for the smaller target? Isn't a tennant of WC to not chase limbs? teep kick to the torso, not the knee.

[Ernie]

http://www.afsacademy.com/video/SavateHighlightsV1.wmv


this more the ring stuff , not street savate bigt difference in application and targets [ groin , eyes , throat , kidney, liver , are street savate ]

but these guys do a few nice moves here and there a little sloppy
but you get the idea

but you really get in the drivers seat and go for a ride :D

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by sihing
Taking nothing away from Wallace, my Sifu patterned some of his kicking repetororie from him, but if you put your body in contact with his ****ed leg, how much power do you think he would have to kick you with? None. You would jam his technique. The problem was the kickboxers fight at a certain range, different from the range a trapper or grappler would fight at, so Wallace's kicks worked good if you stayed out there for him to kick you with. Enter, jam and fight him at a closer range to which his kicks are rendered useless, that would be the key to fighting a Wallace type of fighter, or Thai in this case.

James

not really. The strength of thai boxing doesn't rest in it's roundhouse. You really see the power of a thai fighter in the clinch - knee, elbows, takedowns, etc. he's at home in close range. by jamming his kick and stepping in, you gave him the chance to use his knees and elbows...that's definitely not "key" in their defeat.

[couch]

Originally posted by SevenStar
not really. The strength of thai boxing doesn't rest in it's roundhouse. You really see the power of a thai fighter in the clinch - knee, elbows, takedowns, etc. he's at home in close range. by jamming his kick and stepping in, you gave him the chance to use his knees and elbows...that's definitely not "key" in their defeat.

I recently had a thai fighter put the clinch on me. It was tricky to get out of. And he wasn't even digging into my neck that much. Dodging knees to the ribs....it was a great challenge.

Your mind opens up quick after you try to make things work in a non-Wing Chun situation.

We all have the text-book answers when it comes to wing chun, but that's scary stuff. Real life is real time.

Peace,
Kenton

PS, Ernie...do you recommend any Savate videos to buy? That clip was amazing.

[Ernie]

for savate [ street ] there is only one guy i would go to daniel duby ,

savate champ , jkd guy but prior trained in wing chun in hong kong

just a *real* person , all heart and very very skilled

get his street savate tapes at http://www.straightblastgym.com/video.html

but to be honest i have some of his private seminars and they are way better then the tapes

even have him doing some monkey kung fu the dude is just bad

the crazy thing is his family owns an island and if you want to train with him you go and spend time on the island :D

[Ultimatewingchun]

"If you miss the knee, you get kicked. why go for the smaller target? Isn't a tennant of WC to not chase limbs? teep kick to the torso, not the knee."
(SevenStar)


In TWC..we follow a different approach.

Attacking/checking the opponent's elbows and knees is a big part of the game we play...on the way to attacking the torso/head/face, etc.

Unless of course he just gives you an open shot at his head/face/torso, etc...without having to block/deflect/trap one of his limbs.

Can't count on that, though.

[wing nut]

Originally posted by SevenStar
not really. The strength of thai boxing doesn't rest in it's roundhouse. You really see the power of a thai fighter in the clinch - knee, elbows, takedowns, etc. he's at home in close range. by jamming his kick and stepping in, you gave him the chance to use his knees and elbows...that's definitely not "key" in their defeat.


If you jam his kick by trapping or checking his knee, you will take him off balance. Attacking simultaneously, move in close range using elbow trapping,with punches and elbows and foot work.
If a clinch is attempted, move to keep it in your range. Control your opponent and don't play into their game.

[SevenStar]

I can understand that - you're neutralizing his attack then launching one of your own, from the sound of it - but in the case of kicking, the kick to the torso WOULD neutralize the attack as you are killing his momentum.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by wing nut
If you jam his kick by trapping or checking his knee, you will take him off balance. Attacking simultaneously, move in close range using elbow trapping,with punches and elbows and foot work.
If a clinch is attempted, move to keep it in your range. Control your opponent and don't play into their game.

not necessarily. thai kickers step at an angle when they throw the roundhouse. that is in anticipation of an incoming punch to the face. my momentum is going forward and recovery is quick - unless it's a high kick. (which is why I said not necessarily). When you move in, you are moving into my playground. infighting is infighting - elbows and knees aren't only done from the clinch.

[wing nut]

Originally posted by SevenStar
I can understand that - you're neutralizing his attack then launching one of your own, from the sound of it - but in the case of kicking, the kick to the torso WOULD neutralize the attack as you are killing his momentum.

I agree with you, however, I don't have speed to rely on. I understand that the front kick is very direct compared to the round kick.
I have in many cases taken a good shot just before I can make contact.
It is probably due to bad timing on my part. This is why I prefer to make knee contact.

[wing nut]

Originally posted by SevenStar
not necessarily. thai kickers step at an angle when they throw the roundhouse. that is in anticipation of an incoming punch to the face. my momentum is going forward and recovery is quick - unless it's a high kick. (which is why I said not necessarily). When you move in, you are moving into my playground. infighting is infighting - elbows and knees aren't only done from the clinch.


If I control your Knee properly, you will lose your balance giving me the opportunity to move in.

Yes I realize that there are more than elbows and knees from the clinch.

[wing nut]

While controling the knee, the kick I'm thowing at the same time makes everything come together.

The stonger the kick, the more effective this response works.

[sihing]

Yes, if you apply the right attack and defend at the knee simultaneously you would end up on the more offensive end of things and put the other guy on the defensive. Blocking of any sort then hitting doesn't work against any of these guys that we have seen on the clips provided so far on this thread, they kick to fast and regain their balance very well too. Once your on the offensive you stay their as best you can. Yes if the Thai's clinch with you (and you stand right in front of them to make it possible) you will be in trouble and therefore play their game. Like Victor said, after knee contact is made the next target to watch is the closest elbow point. If this elbow point is obstructing your path to the target trap it and flank to that side of the body giving you a positional advantage (blindside them). Also if my hands are up like they should be then you would have to get through that barrier first before you could clinch with me, and I'm not just going to stand there and let you do that. But please please make contact with the arms, I actually want that so the reflexes take over. I do agree though that it is good training to put yourself in the situation of the clinch and try to recover from there. For every advantage the Thai might have, the elbow and knee, clinch attacks we can have one too. Once again some of the debate on here sounds like if you run into a Thai fighter you as a WC man just might as well collapse in front of them in defeat before you even give yourself a chance. All I've done here is show some strategy and IMO common sense tactics that may work to one's advantage in WC. We too have elbow and knee attacks, we too use the neck control to apply them similar to Thai tactics, or is this not taught in traditional WC.

WingNut,
Some good points of view, and I agree. Where are you from and who do you learn WC from?

Ernie,
I thought WC had all the answers. I agree with you, if trained in the ways of the past it might not, but we as human beings are always adapting and progressing forward, and IMO the WC has too.

James

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Phil,

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
How are you doing Jeff? I will make it to capital city next year God willing.
Phil
Sorry I didn't say anything to this earlier :confused:
If you do come to Ottawa let me know and maybe we could meet up :)

J

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
I will make it to capital city next year God willing. Hey Phil,
If you come to Ottawa, please let us all know. I'd appreciate the chance to meet you.

[anerlich]

anerlich have you messed with these cats yet

No, they're a long way from me. I have got several of Craig Gemenier's weapons videos though, very interesting stuff. Last time I looked he had a "street savate" tape coming out which looked pretty good from the trailer.

AFAIK, both the Aussie savate groups are old friends and spend a lot of time together.

[Edmund]

sihing is correct.

Muay Thai tactics and WC tactics are similar.
By getting closer and tying the opponent up, we avoid being hit by big kicks and punches. This is the one of the best strategies to defending the roundhouse kick.

Using our arms to hold and feel the opponent's balance and control them to line up the knee and to defend any knees.

Each hold has advantages and disadvantages of leverage which allows us to move our opponent and prevent them from moving us. The biggest lever is the neck. We must defend our own and attack the opponents.

In Muay Thai, they train this aspect of fighting separately much like chi sao. By taking hold of each other they practice setting up knees and defending them. They don't just slam knees into each other. They learn holds and counters. Similarly it's not just a test of strength where they yank to and fro as hard as they can.


Originally posted by sihing
Also if my hands are up like they should be then you would have to get through that barrier first before you could clinch with me, and I'm not just going to stand there and let you do that. But please please make contact with the arms, I actually want that so the reflexes take over. I do agree though that it is good training to put yourself in the situation of the clinch and try to recover from there. For every advantage the Thai might have, the elbow and knee, clinch attacks we can have one too. Once again some of the debate on here sounds like if you run into a Thai fighter you as a WC man just might as well collapse in front of them in defeat before you even give yourself a chance. All I've done here is show some strategy and IMO common sense tactics that may work to one's advantage in WC. We too have elbow and knee attacks, we too use the neck control to apply them similar to Thai tactics, or is this not taught in traditional WC.

[YongChun]

Here is something about handling the roundhouse from Bullshido. There is a photo a few posts down and some commentary on it.

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18049

Ray

[sihing]

Interesting photo, sorta similar to what we use in the school here in Calgary and in the association. I would adjust a few things, 1) the defenders right hand, I would put it on the kickers right knee, Pak sao per say, 2) my step(in the photo the defenders left leg/foot) would be directly sideways, and a good 10-16" step, and the left hand would form Tan sao as backup protection. The key would be to contact and control the knee, which has to be raised up to kick someone in the upper gate, stop the knee you stop the kick, so you don't have to worry about his shin or foot.. When applied with the side step the effect is enormous on the person kicking, the rebound back is great and one would probably have to perform an entry tech or Pseudo entry (entry with front kick) familiar to the TWC people, to get the gap closed. Done properly this is very hard for the kicker to counter since most of his time would be spent on trying to regain their balance, while that is happening you would be closing the gap and attacking.

James