Wing Chun on the ground

[AndrewS]

Let's keep the wanking to a minimum and maybe use this thread to actually discuss some *useful* stuff.

Hey KF,

the signal-to-noise ratio here is getting kinda out of control- we may need a separate thread for this. Nonetheless, I'm curious what you think Wing Chun can be good for on the ground.

Principle-wise there are a lot of things that cross over in terms of body use and frame (which, I'll grant, most WC people don't have standing), but there are some specific bits of technique that stand out, too.

A few things to start-

1). If you can't move the other person, move your self.
2). Push
3). Constant pressure from the hips- which you can use to move the other person, or to try to flow around them
4). Stay relaxed- not floppy, not dead, calm and neutral- until you can feel the moment you need to explode
5). Move behind your bone structure- aka 'lan'- create a frame of a piece of skeleton that redirects force but allows you some motion behind it- the standard forearm across the shoulder and chest to make room in side control in order to shrimp is the same thing/idea as lan (barring arm) and kwan (rolling arm)- fix a point (bar the door) so the other guy can't pass it, then move behind that pressure (kwan)
6). Grab and push- the basic lop where you don't pull, but press with hand control- nice for striking control from any top position.

There are some more specifics and probably some more principles I'll think of later, but here's a start.

Andrew

[Vajramusti]

Andrew S- FWIW I have zero problems with your good post.
Joy

[Knifefighter]

Andrew-
I'll share my experiences about using WC techniques on the ground (both good and bad), but furst, I'd like to hear the technical descriptions from those who feel that WC techniques can be applied on the ground.

I think my experiences will be enlightening.

[Wayfaring]

All right - I'll bite and give it a shot from my limited experience to describe what I feel are principles and/or techniques that exist in WCK that can be translated to, applied or utilized in groundfighting.

Principles:

Intent - Constant pressure toward opponent's center - in WCK working from a bridge or even in chi sau, the idea is to get a superior position inside the opponent's reaction time and space and pursue the advantage, driving the opponent backwards. In groundfighting, the same principle applies to obtain advantageous positions and control the opponent, driving backwards into the opponent, through and into the ground for top positions.

Centerline - in WCK the most direct path is a straight line to target. Control of centerline is paramount. All WCK blocks and strikes are designed to capitalize on centerline control. In grappling, arms/legs that travel too far off of center - arms crossed over center or flying out wide of center, are prime targets to attack for submission holds. Elbows in tight are better defensively. I'm sure there's a lot more here on this principle.

Techniques:

Vertical / Chain punch - in my opinion is the best punching attack from the mount. Power is generated from hips, is direct and straight, has maximum impact. Large, looping punches over the top give more space/momentum to bump into a trap & bridge/roll escape.

Elbows - again from the mount, the elbow strikes over the top are effective in combination with punches.

Biu sau / Gan sau - when mounted, these blocks are better than covering up because contact with the striking arm happens further out, so can absorb more power and give more opportunity for trapping the striking arm. Have to be careful leaving one dangling - it can be picked off and submitted via arm bar or keylock.

Rgds,
Dave

[old jong]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Andrew-
I'll share my experiences about using WC techniques on the ground (both good and bad), but furst, I'd like to hear the technical descriptions from those who feel that WC techniques can be applied on the ground.

I think my experiences will be enlightening.

I bet it will be :rolleyes:

[SAAMAG]

What wing chun actually (aside from EBMAS and LT) actually have groundwork? Wherein they are actually on the ground working with people who are good....on the ground?

In any case...lets look at something even more simple then the typical lin wan kuen, or gan, biu or whatever....what does wing chun have in terms of positioning on the ground? That is the first thing you learn on the ground is to gain good position and retain it...and to escape from bad positioning....so what does wing chun offer there...forget the punching if and elbows and biu sao's for now...

[Wayfaring]

In any case...lets look at something even more simple then the typical lin wan kuen, or gan, biu or whatever....what does wing chun have in terms of positioning on the ground? That is the first thing you learn on the ground is to gain good position and retain it...and to escape from bad positioning....so what does wing chun offer there...forget the punching if and elbows and biu sao's for now...

I have seen counters to takedowns, working from the back - kicks and stripping of grips, and standing up protected.

I have not seen a systematic approach to ground work like the 6 basic positions in BJJ, transition between the positions, submissions and strikes from each position, escapes and counters from each position, rips/dirty techniques specific to positions, or consistent testing in stressed environments of any of the above.

Has anyone else?

[old jong]

Wing Chun is a pugilistic art that works best at very close range.Chi Sau and Chi Gerk training can provide good control of an opponent in a quasi-clinch range.Grabs that could lead to grappling can be nullified.Short punches,palms low kicks,elbows,knees,even headbutts are the main arsenal at this distance.Wing Chun can make somebody very dangerous to approach if it is used accordingly to it's principles.

IMO,the basic ground stuff can be learned as emergency techniques it is not such a big deal.

[SAAMAG]

No OJ it's not such a big deal and one can learn it in a relatively short time...that's why I can't seem to understand one simple thing....

Why no one on here can just friggin admit that wing chun simply does not have any ground game. Period. It's like the people here are almost afraid...as if they're going to turn to dust the minute they say : "no...wing chun does not have any training in "this" area of fighting."

I've been waiting and waiting and waiting...but people keep coming up with "waaaah...what about this or that or this or that...it has everything because my daddy told me it does...you just have to find it!" I grow weary of those who just can't admit something soooo simple, all because they don't want to have to go outside their bubble to gain the proper information.

And sorry if any one person takes this to heart...but the first one offended by it...is probably the one most afraid of admitting it.

[SAAMAG]

And another thing....

Wing chun as good as it is...does need supplementation, because as OJ just said himself...



Wing Chun is a pugilistic art that works best at very close range.Chi Sau and Chi Gerk training can provide good control of an opponent in a quasi-clinch range.Grabs that could lead to grappling can be nullified.Short punches,palms low kicks,elbows,knees,even headbutts are the main arsenal at this distance.Wing Chun can make somebody very dangerous to approach if it is used accordingly to it's principles.


It works in THAT range. Anything else in fighting needs to be found elsewhere.

See...I didn't turn to dust because I said it....so now it's safe for you all to as well!

Have a nice day ya'll!

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I hate going to the ground, period :eek: When I was doing Judo I used to get yelled at because I would perform a throw and then step back, let my oppenent get back to his feet and then throw them again. Unfortunately this was frowned upon during competition so I did end up doing some ground work. But, I still hate it!!!! I get very uncomfortable on the ground thinking about the possible buddies standing around waiting to attack me while I am preoccupied with their friend, on the ground. Plus it is dirty down there and I would need to bathe more often after rolling around on the ground. Egads! I might even need to use soap!!

Seriously though, if I can ever be serious ;)

Sifu Chung Kwok Chow has integrated BJJ and other ground fighting into his system of Wing Chun. He has a new DVD out, which I have not seen, addressing just this aspect of Wing Chun/Ground Fighting. So there are others besides Emin and LT exploring this area and making it a part of their system of Wing Chun. But, to my understanding this is always the result of bringing something from outside the system into it. For more info you can visit Sifu Chows site at: www.sifuchowwingchun.com

Peace,

Dave

[sihing]

Originally posted by Vankuen
No OJ it's not such a big deal and one can learn it in a relatively short time...that's why I can't seem to understand one simple thing....

Why no one on here can just friggin admit that wing chun simply does not have any ground game. Period. It's like the people here are almost afraid...as if they're going to turn to dust the minute they say : "no...wing chun does not have any training in "this" area of fighting."

I've been waiting and waiting and waiting...but people keep coming up with "waaaah...what about this or that or this or that...it has everything because my daddy told me it does...you just have to find it!" I grow weary of those who just can't admit something soooo simple, all because they don't want to have to go outside their bubble to gain the proper information.

And sorry if any one person takes this to heart...but the first one offended by it...is probably the one most afraid of admitting it.

(This reply is also posted on another thread, but I thought it would apply here in specific response to Van's above post.)

Basically back in 96' people started asking what do you do when someone is shooting as an attack, instead of the usual punch or kick entry. Now, I'm not going to try and explain in detail exactly every technique Sifu taught because it would be impractical here on this forum, but maybe I can get some footage of that stuff too and put it up sometime. Basically, when standing in the side neutral stance, which is the non contact stage stance that we use in our WC (basically one is standing square on with your opponent, like a basketball player defending his zone, but with the body turned either left or right on a 45 deg angle depending on the lead arm), and having the opponents foot/knee always (or as best as one can) down the center of one's stance, this allows great lateral movement. When one shoots for our lower extremities, and since there is no lead leg to grab, it is first a longer distance to travel to get at the leg or hip or whatever body part the shooter is try to grab, therefore the defender has a bit more time to react. Also the attacker is projecting his energy forward, or forward at an angle, us as defenders have to interpret quickly in which side of the body the shooter is going for if not down the center. Again because we have superior lateral movement from side to side, we basically use the Matador philosophy to let the person pass us by, but at the same time we can either attack & control the opponent by using a variety of hand movements (low Bil Sao, Kan sao, low pak sao, etc..) to various areas around the neck or behind the neck to attempt to control the opponent on his way down to the ground, all the while maintaining a close proximity to him to attack and dissolve most anything that comes from him.

As for being mounted, we try to force the opponent to strike us using round movements by protecting our centerlines (using double tan sao's, similar to a move I saw Matt Thornton using on one of his tapes). At the right moment, utilizing skills learned in chi-sao and various other drills, one could apply a bil sao/lap sao combined with a side palm strike to the carotid artery or anywhere to the side of the neck or a Bil Gee to the eyes, quickly followed by another lap sao from the striking hand/forearm/fingers, with a hip upturn to possibly overturn the opponent, with us gaining mounting position. There are tons of things we can do, all from the WC we use, and one has to adapt to the situation as one see's fit, as is the case we any real situation.

James

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by old jong
Wing Chun is a pugilistic art that works best at very close range. Well, so far, based on the evidence (all the videos that have been posted showing WC being used) and all the analyses of the majority of the forum posters ("just kickboxing"; "sloppy"; "no WC skills shown"; "very low level"), it doesn't seem to work very well there either.

[Knifefighter]

The first time I saw BJJ groundfightiing was about 1990. I was working out in a boxing gym and these guys came in and set up some mats. They were working from different positions on the ground. When I saw the guard and the mount, I immediately thought how gay the guard looked. Then I thought, "Hey, that’s the perfect position from which to work a chi sao -type approach. I’m pretty sure I could school them from there using chi sao techniques. I’ll bet they’ve never come across someone who knows WC. I think I could just pak, lop, bil, and blast my way right through those guys."

A couple of years later, I decided to check out the Gracie Academy, where I finally got a chance to test out my theories. Needless to say, I was arm-barred, choked, and triangled all over the mat. I quickly discovered that my theories didn’t work against people who knew ground fighting and submissions.

Over the years I have learned a few things about my original theories:
- Forget trying to use anything resembling these types of techniques when you are in the bottom mounted position. You will jus open yourself up for a world of hurt.
- While some chi sao techniques can be used from the top mounted position, they often leave you open to be reversed and I believe there are much better ways to attack from there.
- I also believe there are much better ways to work when in the bottom guard position.
- There was one area where I was somewhat right in my initial thoughts. You can successfully use some of these techniques from inside the person’s guard to G&P or to open a tough closed guard, providing you are knowledgeable enough to avoid the bottom person’s submissions while doing so.

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by Sihing73
. . . Sifu Chung Kwok Chow has integrated BJJ and other ground fighting into his system of Wing Chun. He has a new DVD out, which I have not seen, addressing just this aspect of Wing Chun/Ground Fighting. So there are others besides Emin and LT exploring this area and making it a part of their system of Wing Chun. But, to my understanding this is always the result of bringing something from outside the system into it. For more info you can visit Sifu Chows site at: www.sifuchowwingchun.com
Peace,
Dave
Hmmm, Didn't the pole came from "outside" of WC?
PR

[Sihing73]

Hi Phil,

As already mentioned on a previous thread, I think I pointed out that the pole came from outside of the Wing Chun System. I think that it is necessary for our art to continously evolve to meet the needs and threats we may face today. There is nothing wrong, IMHO, with integrating things from outside of the system provided that they are used to enhance and build upon the foundation which has already been laid. I am sure that an examination of the training methods of any art/sport and even educational institution will show changes over time. If not then that entity is most likely on the way to extinction.

Peace,

Dave

[Vajramusti]

Andrew S's initial post on this thread was a very constructive start.

But the discussions has gone off in different directions.

Some things forgotten in the noise.

Lots of systems have punches. But an experienced wing chun person's punches are practiced differently.

Lots of systems have "saus" but wing chun open hand techniques also have their own details.

Same for some of the points touched on in Andew S's post
and occasionally referred to elsewhere.
Shrimping, bridging, push-pull alternatives, moving yourself
, relaxing and exploding etc... can be done from different grappling perspectives
or from well practiced wing chun perspectives. The difference again is in the details... the nature of the engine, the gears, the wheels. And the devil is always in the details.

And cant depend ona specific technique because the other fella's position etc has to be taken into account.

The wing chun person need not change his engine-there isnt time in a real crisis.

joy

[t_niehoff]

Vankuen wrote:

Why no one on here can just friggin admit that wing chun simply does not have any ground game. Period. It's like the people here are almost afraid...as if they're going to turn to dust the minute they say : "no...wing chun does not have any training in "this" area of fighting."

**Well, that's what I've been saying -- WCK doesn't have groundfighting, it doesn't have the tools (techniques, strategies, etc.) to successfully work in that situation. Sure some WCK concepts will overlap with those of a good groundfighter, and some "techniques" will overlap, but the stuff you need to be successful on the ground, the meat and potatoes, just isn't in the WCK method.

**Now it's easy for folks to say that WCK does have groundfighting, but historically it was never taught, no one in WCK even talked about it until *after* the Cheung-Boztepe incident (when suddenly it appeard in both of those camps), and never became a big deal until after the Gracie/BJJ popularity. Moreover, all those folks that claim WCK does have groundfighting are theoreticians -- they make that claim from theory, from conjecture, or from hearsay. None of them make it from personal experience, from having successfully fought a skilled groundfighter; none of them are willing to step up and mix it up with a skilled groundfighter to demonstrate their ability. It's all theoretical BS.

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

Originally posted by old jong : Wing Chun is a pugilistic art that works best at very close range.

Knifefighter responded:

Well, so far, based on the evidence (all the videos that have been posted showing WC being used) and all the analyses of the majority of the forum posters ("just kickboxing"; "sloppy"; "no WC skills shown"; "very low level"), it doesn't seem to work very well there either.

**Once again, old jong posts theory. You can almost always spot theory when it's a general statement (like "WCK is . . ." ). I'm not saying his theory is wrong, but that it is theory -- some claim. It's a different matter to post your personal observations based on experience (I've found or my expression is or whatever).

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

**Finally, let me say this: whether you believe WCK has groundfighting (tools) or not, there is a second issue: have you developed them? Developing skill in groundfighting comes from groundfighting, and from actually groundfighting with skilled opponents. So even if we say for the sake of argument WCK has groudnfighting, unless you do it and do it against skilled opponents, it will remain undeveloped. So once again, for all those folks that claim WCK has groundfighting, like Joy, how much time do you spend fighting on the ground? Against whom? What is their level of groundfighting skill? Because even if you are correct and wCK has groundfighting, if you don't put in the time fighting, it will remain theory to you. And if you have spent the time on the ground and have developed it, why not step up and prove it?

[old jong]

Originally posted by old jong : Wing Chun is a pugilistic art that works best at very close range.

**Once again, old jong posts theory. You can almost always spot theory when it's a general statement (like "WCK is . . ." ). I'm not saying his theory is wrong, but that it is theory -- some claim. It's a different matter to post your personal observations based on experience (I've found or my expression is or whatever).

Sorry to hear (but not surprised) that you consider Wing Chun as a long range pugilistic art.It explains a lot.

[SAAMAG]

...I just posted it on the "Open mind" thread...


Originally posted by Vankuen
No Dave you're making sense, I understand exactly what you are saying. (I think....)

Wing chun techniques are alive and transposable and the techniques used in a fight are not chosen by you but rather the person you are fighting...I don't do tan sau, the opponent brings out tan sau. That is true. This is very easy to apply when fighting someone with energies that you are familiar with such as another wing chun person or another CMA with similiar moves and counters.

Fight someone that doesn't play the same or a similar game...and then that concept is a bit harder to apply. When a person never bridges with you (and is good enough to do so) how do you "feel" which movement the opponent is "requesting" next? On the ground in a submission hold, will tan sau or fok sao or biu sau help you to get out of an arm bar or triangle choke, or to even counter one in the process of it's application? If you're fighting a thai fighter and goes to throw a full on round kick at you, are you going to choose tan sau it or gan sau it? (the kick didn't bring it out, as there was no touching before the kick happened....) Some people don't know what to change their techniques into midstream if it's an energy that they've never or rarely been exposed to.

Do you see what I'm saying? So the need to drill based on visual triggers is necessary as well. Not all the attacks coming toward you will be done in a fashion that you will be able to apply the "use whatever technique the opponent brings out" if you've never really been accustomed to being attacked by that technique. And that brings us full circle to having to train in at least all the general areas of fighting....not so much every little tiny little thing like the icepick that Joy mentioned before....but the general areas of fighting such as the long range game with more mobile footwork, the clinching and throwing /counterthrowing game, the ground GRAPPLING game (not just ground "fighting", because then you're missing out on a chunk of the ground game), just some of the areas that wing chun doesn't specialize in. And here's the kicker in doing so...while you're trianing in these areas with people that know them well...you can still learn to apply your wing chun there (if you can) by experimenting with these guys while learning their methods. That would be the ultimate test/training to learn to apply wing chun in those areas.

So you see, there really is no downside...you can expand your wing chun into those areas while training there...while you're learning their methods as well. It's a win win situation.

The reason I know this is because I did it myself when I trained in BJJ and muay thai. I applied wing chun concepts in both areas and still do. In certain exchanges I can use the attributes I gained in chi sau to help me feel where the other guy is going with his arms, but then switch back to JJ techniques when I need to counter or apply something of my own, as nothing else at the time in my wing chun arsenal would've helped me in that INSTANT. In muay thai, as it was mentioned in other posts, I can apply wing chun straight line closing techniques while I fight, even with gloves on, I can intercept (although found in other styles...i learned it in wing chun and JKD and so that's where I credit it.) and so that's what I'm saying here. When I go to the MT even though Im doing muay thai, Im still doing wing chun at times. When I go train with MMA (which I need to do again after my wrist heals) I will still use wing chun gained attributes to help me in certain instances where applicable (when striking or counter striking, sticking to the arms to gain position, etc.)

But at this point I'm rambling...I think you guys get the point here.

[RedJunkRebel]

Originally posted by Sihing73
Hi Phil,

As already mentioned on a previous thread, I think I pointed out that the pole came from outside of the Wing Chun System. I think that it is necessary for our art to continously evolve to meet the needs and threats we may face today. There is nothing wrong, IMHO, with integrating things from outside of the system provided that they are used to enhance and build upon the foundation which has already been laid. I am sure that an examination of the training methods of any art/sport and even educational institution will show changes over time. If not then that entity is most likely on the way to extinction.

Peace,

Dave

Amen. I couldn't agree more.

[Vajramusti]

As already mentioned on a previous thread, I think I pointed out that the pole came from outside of the Wing Chun System. I think that it is necessary for our art to continously evolve to meet the needs and threats we may face today.
Peace,

Dave
-----------------------------------------------------

((Sure Dave. However, wing chun defined it's own pole usage and it blends with wing chun dynamics
and Ip Man's pole usage is different from others who use
poles.

Sure good things keep evolving... and wing chun has.
Ip Man added his stamp to his art-- so did some of his best students and the best students's students. And those changes will continue. And- some major shift could occur if a more comprehensive art emerges.

But not all change is progress. And not understanding the art well enough and mixing extraneous things in our media age which dont mesh well isnt progress. IMO

Many who have not learned the fundamentals well- no longer how long they have been around- can be taken down easily. Adding this and that in grappling wont save them from being taken down again. Cant blame the art for that.))Joy

[RedJunkRebel]

I agree with you Joy. Having a strong foundation in Wing Chun is crucial before anyone should think about bringing in anything new to it. One should learn the entire system before anyone can determine what it may be lacking. Thanks for your thoughts.

[anerlich]

One should learn the entire system before anyone can determine what it may be lacking.

How long does that take? and if you have to learn the whole system before you can determine what is lacking, how can you ever know if/when you have learned the whole system?

Some comments on earlier posts:

The TWC side neutral stance makes single leg attacks more difficult than a stance with a leg forward. However it makes double leg or clinching attacks very much easier. Move to another stance and the takedown artist will also switch his attack.

Throwing a flurry of punches from on top of mount, straight-blast style is not particularly efficient, unless the guy is just about out anyway. If he's flailing around you might crack your hands on his skull. Far better to control his head - one way is to turn his head to the side and hold his jaw down with your palm, where you can target you strikes more precisely as well as restricting his ability to escape. Another is to get an armwrap and move to sidemount (not side control/ cross side), reputedly Rickson's favorite position to deliver strikes. Another common tactic is to lay on the guy and arc punches in to head or body.

WC doesn't really help a lot of you're stuck here, especially if the guy is smothering you. You want your hands close, covering your face or neck. stick out a tan sao or try to chi sao with the guy here, you'll get armlocked PDQ. Reducing damage and excape should be your only priority here.

BJJ, or Machado BJJ as taught in Australia, has a centreline principle for establishing and keeping the guard. Development of tactile sensitivity is also essential. So is efficiency,economy, keeping the elbows close to the body. Some of the WC hands can work in part in applying various submissions or sweeps, and people with WC experience can often adapt to a BJJ technique quickler if you explain it in that language.

I think there are gross similarities between WC and BJJ. as there can be found some commonality among manyt MA's. But if the devil is in the detail, they are chalk and cheese.

TWC has ground fighting. But its sole concern is defending yourself with strikes, mainly kicks, when felled and either taking the guy out from here or getting enough time and space to regain your feet.

That tactic, stylistic considerations aside, can work. Allen Goes used it to excellent effect against Sakuraba in their Pride fight (Belfort much less so in his fight against Sakuraba). Renzo knocked Oleg Taktarov out this way. Of course, both these guys have pretty hot BJJ ground games to back the tactics up.

I have to disagree that you can take WC to a grappling range fgiht with both antagonists on the floor. There is some intersection of WC skills to groung grappling, but that area of intersection is pretty small.

[AndrewS]

Terence writes:

>None of them make it from personal experience, from having successfully fought a skilled groundfighter; none of them are willing to step up and mix it up with a skilled groundfighter to demonstrate their ability. It's all theoretical BS.

Hang on for a second there Terence. I chased sifu Emin around on his 1995 seminar tour, picked up as much of his 'anti-grappling' as I could, and was out fighting full-contact with it inside of a month, and I'm not the only one. I happily stepped up to all manner of folks with grappling backgrounds for a decade, using the stuff I learned from Emin, and frankly, did ok. Is it the be-all, end-all? No, but I, and a bunch of other folks, have taken it out and done our research.

When I tested what I learned from sifu Emin in terms of 'antigrappling' it *encouraged* me that what he was showing was on the right track, and it has influenced the way in which I've studied grappling deeply.

Part of that influence has been an encouragement to go out and study grappling (and other arts), just like he has and continues to do, to take responsibility for my own development.

Part of that influence has been to take certain principles as common in both standing and the floor:

1). Improve position whenever possible with a hierarchy of positions
2). Use attack to improve position- always try to wind up in a better place than you started
3). Use attack as defense- try to stop an opponent's actions in a way that both counters and gives them something they have to deal with
4). Use defense as attack- try to make it so your counters don't just stop the other guy, they make his life hell
5). Everything comes from motion

Part of that influence has been in body mechanics:

1). Use a piece sometimes while the rest of you does something else- link and unlink, a defining piece of mechanics for Wing Chun.
2). Use everything when you can, preferably against as little as possible.
3). Use your hips and spine.
4). Use your adduction to potentiate the flexor component of your trunk
5). use your gluts and low back to potentiate the extensor component of your trunk

Part of that influence has been in training:
1). Work live isolated sparring for each action
2). Do massive amounts of open guard work with no hands allowed
3). Work escapes
4). Catch transitional timing for counters

Part of that influence has been specific techniques:

1). Use your feet like hooks- twisting (huen) to break and control when someone grabs your ankles
2). Constantly kick and scissor when on your back, preventing passes with up kicks
3). Try to destabilize at three points before bridging someone off you
4). Move out of the line of an arm bar to take pressure off your shoulder (i.e. try to get off the 90) while removing the legs (nb- if you're doing this, you're near the end of the armbar and are basically f*cked, going for a last ditch counter).
5). Stand up with an ankle lock
6). Some specific sweeps vs. the over/under guard pass

I've found the first three parts most useful, but that's because my preference is for learning tools and principles, developing my body, then finding the 'techniques' that work for me by getting experience. Generally, when I 'find' something, I go check one of my seniors or partners and look for input on fine tuning.

My goal is *not* to be a guy who does a bunch of different martial arts, but to be a conditioned athlete with a number of strategies which are consistent when standing, on the ground, or with a weapon in hand, with my mechanics and timing in each area reinforcing the other.

This is what I've learned from Wing Chun.

FWIW,

Andrew

[Knifefighter]

Interesting post Andrew. I've often wondered about Emin's "anti-grappling" stuff. I know many people have scoffed at it, but having developed some of my own unconventional anti-grappling tactics, I've always thought that it could have some merit when developed by someone with a wrestling and striking background.

[Nick Forrer]

Yeah its good stuff and the guy has some cool moves. The stuff he showed us:

Single leg takedown. A tries to pick up Bs front leg and B must keep leg on floor using adductor muscles. He can also push down As head to avoid being taken down.

On the floor:

!)They try and pass your guard you stay facing them. Change over once they succeed.

!!)Keep your knees locked together – they try and break through your knees to get into your guard.

!!!)They underhook your leg in preparation to pass your guard, you trap their head with the underhooked leg and knee them with the other leg.

Variations on !!!)-
if they post other hand over free leg knee them in ribs,
if they block knee with hand bring leg over, do a jut gurk on that arm and kick them in the throat
if they pull their head away as they underhook the leg let it go over then turn it into a lan (bar) gerk and kick them away with the free leg.

!!!!)Use a scissor sweep on them and as they go over, turn over post with both hands (so you are facing down) and knee them in the head.

[AndrewS]

Dale,

it's a different take. Honestly, I'm heavily flavored by more conventional sources, and am now kinda re-addressing this stuff with him, as I haven't really gone through it since I moved out here. The past two years my ground work has been BJJ no-gi focused (if you can call flaky on again off again training focused in any way).

The experience Emin draws on is pretty impressive, and it breeds some interesting results.

I've been doing a fair bit of training with him when he's in town, and his take on open guard is pretty cool. He uses the adductin of the main stance to keep the knees tight, is a b*tch to split, is constantly working your balance with his knees, moves his body out with lots of lateral hip motion- this combination makes him extremely able to apply the elbow-in changes, which most people characterize as Wing Chun, to control and redirect hand-fighting while striking, until he can percussively sweep.

Haven't seen him do it on someone good, but I was impressed.

With this, I wonder whether the problems you mention working Wing Chun hands from guard- were you working with a closed guard? Those things do a bit better with some hip usage, motion in transverse or coronal planes, which closed guard kinda limits.

Later,

Andrew

[t_niehoff]

Hi Andrew,

Two things --

First, I know some WCK people, especially those with a background in various grappling methods that have and do mix it up with groundfighters. I put Emin (and Kernspecht) in that category. See my next point.

Second, I'm sure Emin's "anti-grappling system" has merit but it's not "pure" or "traditional" WCK, it's his personal system that combines WCK and grappling. That's not a bad thing. But that's not what I was talking about -- the "WCK has answers on the ground" crew. It's fairly common knowledge that Emin had a grappling background before coming to WCK, and I think he took that background (understanding things like the "heirarchy of positions", etc. which are outside of WCK), combined some basic grappling with some of aspects of WCK, emphasized those aspects (to make it easier for his students to incorporate) and presto! Nothing wrong with that -- but his antigrappling system is "more" than WCK. I give him credit for doing what he's done.

As you know, having the tools are one thing, developing them, and then being able to fight skillfully with them is a horse of a different color. A person can't develop significant groundfighting skill other than by groundfighting with skilled folks. And a person can't know if what they are training will genuinely work or not without mixing it up with skilled fighters. I know that you and some others are actually doing that -- but I also know that there are plenty of "theorists" who aren't but still believe their views are valid. My complaint is directed at those who have never mixed it up with any skilled groundfighters yet *know* (LOL) WCK has all the answers.

[Vajramusti]

More nonsense:
Second, I'm sure Emin's "anti-grappling system" has merit but it's not "pure" or "traditional" WCK, it's his personal system that combines WCK and grappling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(((The conclusion is already confirmed in the premise- darned if you do- darned if you dont---

"WCK is no good on the ground.
If you develop defenses on the ground it must not be wck---
must be something personal and not pure and smuggled from previous experience.
Therefore, wck is no good on the ground."

A different view---
Spend quality time in learning wing chun. Practice. Experiment gradually in keeping with development stage.
Wing chun takes quality time in learning- more to it than the sequences in forms.
Practice not being taken to the ground. Develop a live strong but flexible
stance and mobility. If taken to the ground play your own game rather than out envisioning out-grappling a grappler. Learn wing chun attack lines well. Sense the balance points and use the platforms for power delivery that open up whenever they do. You need to sense these things.
Be relaxed. Develop control. And deliverable short power
from all possible angles for strikes or pre strike controls.
The wing chun engine can work with and use many gears and clutches and transmissions of power delivery..
Madame wing chun, Leung Jan, Ip Man and "your"momma
(or Couture or Lidell)wont help you- but your understanding
of wing chun, self confidence and guts could..

Be at peace with yourself- depending on time and place
all kinds of bad luck can occur besides the appearance of
someone interested in taking you to the ground.

Gradually build up your wing chun skills- the chances are slim that you will be attacked by Rickson at the street corner
tomorrow.

Not just theory but no chest thumping on "experience" either- thank you. And- i am not in the marketing business.

BTW- directed at those seriously interested in wing chun
and not directed at wc skeptics and trolls.

If you dont have enough confidence in wing chun- its ok to
find somethong that you can use. Conquer fear- there is life before and after wing chun ( or grappling).
Develop awareness, preparation, best possible good health rather than paranoia.

[t_niehoff]

Joy wrote:

More nonsense:
Second, I'm sure Emin's "anti-grappling system" has merit but it's not "pure" or "traditional" WCK, it's his personal system that combines WCK and grappling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(((The conclusion is already confirmed in the premise- darned if you do- darned if you dont---

**I have a WCK student that was a Div. 1, NCAA, varsity wrestler. The fact that he can fight on the ground has nothing to do with his WCK skills (he could do that, like Boztepe, before he came to WCK).

**Joy, as an example, WCK will not help you escape (or survive) the mount or the guard against anyone good, it doesn't give us those tools. The bridge, elbow-escape, shrimping, knowledge of submissions (so we don't get caught in them), etc. aren't in our WCK toolbox. Nor do we have the tools that will permit us to take advantage of the mount (the submisions, associate body movements, etc.) or pass their guard. Yip Man did not teach groundfighting, nor did YKS/Sum or any other traditional source. Moreoever, even with those tools, it takes hundreds of hours of practice (live grappling with resisting, skilled opponents) to develop it significantly. Who in WCK does that?

"WCK is no good on the ground.
If you develop defenses on the ground it must not be wck---
must be something personal and not pure and smuggled from previous experience.
Therefore, wck is no good on the ground."

**If a WCK practitioner gets knocked to the ground, sure there are things they can do, like kick or punch, etc. A boxer would do that too! But that doesn't mean boxing has groundfighting. Neither boxing or WCK is a groundfightng method, neither really prepares us for dealing with good groundfighters. Experience will prove that. Having a few things one can try does not make one a competant groundfighter. Similarly, BJJ has some stand-up that enables them to try and survive until they can get the take down, but it no one would say BJJ hascompetant stand-up -- they don't have the tools, they don't train stand-up, etc.

A different view---
Spend quality time in learning wing chun. Practice. Experiment gradually in keeping with development stage.

**That begs the question of how can one determine what quality WCK is? By theory? Reputation? Ability to do chi sao well?

Wing chun takes quality time in learning- more to it than the sequences in forms.
Practice not being taken to the ground. Develop a live strong but flexible
stance and mobility. If taken to the ground play your own game rather than out envisioning out-grappling a grappler. Learn wing chun attack lines well. Sense the balance points and use the platforms for power delivery that open up whenever they do. You need to sense these things.
Be relaxed. Develop control. And deliverable short power
from all possible angles for strikes or pre strike controls.
The wing chun engine can work with and use many gears and clutches and transmissions of power delivery..

**This is all theory -- and sounds like "trust in the force, Luke": it sounds great, but it won't work. Let's see evidence of your approach rather than theory. There's a reason we don't see the evidence: because things won't work like that. Go visit a good groundfighter and see for yourself. Have them take the mount and see what you can do. Have them put you in the guard and see what you can do. You don't need to take my word for it. (But I would be willing to put some money on it. ;) ).

Madame wing chun, Leung Jan, Ip Man and "your"momma
(or Couture or Lidell)wont help you- but your understanding
of wing chun, self confidence and guts could..

Be at peace with yourself- depending on time and place
all kinds of bad luck can occur besides the appearance of
someone interested in taking you to the ground.

Gradually build up your wing chun skills- the chances are slim that you will be attacked by Rickson at the street corner
tomorrow.

**Very true, but you do stand the chance of being taken down and put in a head-and-arm or mounted by someone that has some high school wrestling (and who has watched a UFC and thinks "gound-and-pound" is great), and if you don't have the skills, you'll find yourself unable to cope. Just try getting out of a solid standing headlock that some strong guy slaps on you and you'll see WCK's limits (and if you think you'll "grab the peaches" or "poke the eyes", it's because you never had someone that knew what to do put a headlock on you -- you'll never get the chance).

Not just theory but no chest thumping on "experience" either- thank you. And- i am not in the marketing business.

BTW- directed at those seriously interested in wing chun
and not directed at wc skeptics and trolls.

**I'm not a "WC skeptic" but a WCK realist -- it's fine and dandy to have beliefs, it's another thing to step up and test them. Of course, everyone is highlyskilled behind closed doors. The bottom line is no WCK person without grappling experience has ever been able to deal with a good groundfighter on the ground. I'm not saying everyone should study groundfighting. If you don't want to do it, don't. If you don't want to be a well-rounded fighter, that's fine. You can be really good at WCK without having any ground game.

If you dont have enough confidence in wing chun- its ok to
find somethong that you can use. Conquer fear- there is life before and after wing chun ( or grappling).
Develop awareness, preparation, best possible good health rather than paranoia.

**Lots of people have confidence because they are deluded. And some claim to have confidence. But what I don't understand is that if they are so confident, why the reluctance to put themselves in positions to prove what they believe?

[Vajramusti]

Terence asks:
But what I don't understand is that if they are so confident, why the reluctance to put themselves in positions to prove what they believe?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terence-
There are folks who do want to prove to themselves that what they can do "works". And some have. But not everyone will get their psyches jarred because they have not proved it you or others folks on a side of an imaginary line in the sand.

I made my point and you made yours. We have never met. Why not let it go at that?...

[AndrewS]

Terence,

fair enough. Anyone who thinks you can get better without putting the work in is so far gone and delusional that they aren't worth the time, though.

Terence and Joy,

why don't we try to keep this thread concrete, and add a few specifics.

Nick,

that body mechanic for stopping the single is freaky and weird and I'm still playing with it- it's something I haven't developed. I spent about 1/2 hr working on just that with sifu Emin last month. I couldn't get his foot more than 3 inches off the floor, switching between singles and doubles - lifting, and not trying to turn the corner or anything, just going into his mechanic trying to deadlift his &*^&^( leg to no avail. The head control helped but there was some composite of adduction, hamstring work (which he kept emphasizing), and hip usage, that I need to play with more.

Any thoughts? Have you analyzed that at all? It seems related to the kick-through/ stomp through defenses to singles, but he seemed to imply that the linkages should be constant.

Later,

Andrew

[taltos]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I have a WCK student that was a Div. 1, NCAA, varsity wrestler.

I have sidai that were Ohio State first string wrestlers, 10 year Army Ranger veterans, and NHB fighters.


Originally posted by t_niehoff
WCK will not help you escape (or survive) the mount or the guard against anyone good, it doesn't give us those tools.

Said Ohio State wrestler, when last we tested, could actually get me (and my fellow seniors) to the ground less than 1 out of 20 shoots. The Army Ranger, more often. But that's why we train, no?

Point being that a WC curriculum DID and DOES give us the tools to test against resisting opponents who know what they are doing, and to come out of such a test on the winning side.


Originally posted by t_niehoff
Lots of people have confidence because they are deluded. And some claim to have confidence. But what I don't understand is that if they are so confident, why the reluctance to put themselves in positions to prove what they believe?

Some people only feel the need to prove things to themselves, and don't owe anything to anyone else.

Maybe if those people saw some proof (other than forum claims) from those demanding the proof they would me more likely to meet halfway. Or maybe they just don't feel the need to have a swordfight.

-Levi

[old jong]

Just pick a thick newspaper and make a roll out of it.Strike repeatedly on the head or nose with it....I know it worked on all dogs hugging my leg.

[Nick Forrer]

Originally posted by AndrewS

Nick,

that body mechanic for stopping the single is freaky and weird and I'm still playing with it- it's something I haven't developed. I spent about 1/2 hr working on just that with sifu Emin last month. I couldn't get his foot more than 3 inches off the floor, switching between singles and doubles - lifting, and not trying to turn the corner or anything, just going into his mechanic trying to deadlift his &*^&^( leg to no avail. The head control helped but there was some composite of adduction, hamstring work (which he kept emphasizing), and hip usage, that I need to play with more.

Any thoughts? Have you analyzed that at all? It seems related to the kick-through/ stomp through defenses to singles, but he seemed to imply that the linkages should be constant.

Yeah. at 6'2 and 10 years of weights im not small but when i tried to pick his leg up of the floor all i did was pull my self into him. The WT stance is plenty different from ours so im not so au fait with the mechanics. Visualising compressing a steel spring between the knees might go so some way though. Actually I remember him saying 'I bet some of you are thinking ill go and do leg adductions on the weight machines (which spookily was exactly what i was thinking) but this is about isometric/static strength not dynamic strength'.

FWIW, Ricardo Viera (leo's brother) showed me recently what hed do in that scenario i.e. immediately turn the corner, snake his hand through to the far leg and do a rear double ankle pick.

He also had some cool single defences. For eg he has shot to your right leg head inside. You snkae left hand through your own legs and grab the back of his left tricep and grab his right arm with your right. Step forward with left leg (the free one) sit down on your left foot and kick straight up with right foot. This will flip him right over and you move into side control.

[AmanuJRY]

Andrew,

This says it all.


Originally posted by AndrewS
My goal is *not* to be a guy who does a bunch of different martial arts, but to be a conditioned athlete with a number of strategies which are consistent when standing, on the ground, or with a weapon in hand, with my mechanics and timing in each area reinforcing the other.

This is what I've learned from Wing Chun.


Great post!

[sihing]

Originally posted by taltos
I have sidai that were Ohio State first string wrestlers, 10 year Army Ranger veterans, and NHB fighters.
Said Ohio State wrestler, when last we tested, could actually get me (and my fellow seniors) to the ground less than 1 out of 20 shoots. The Army Ranger, more often. But that's why we train, no?
Point being that a WC curriculum DID and DOES give us the tools to test against resisting opponents who know what they are doing, and to come out of such a test on the winning side.

Some people only feel the need to prove things to themselves, and don't owe anything to anyone else.

Maybe if those people saw some proof (other than forum claims) from those demanding the proof they would me more likely to meet halfway. Or maybe they just don't feel the need to have a swordfight.
-Levi

Good post Levi, especially the last paragraph, some have no need to prove anything to anyone, it's called a lack of ego, and strong faith based on one's experience and training that has gotten them solid quality skills, already proven through the various test that are required from those responsible and in charge of their training and instruction as well as one's own standards and internal quality control. Quality is quality gentlemen and ladies, it is undeniable when it is perfomed and seen, and it is undeniable when confronted by another in physical combat.

James

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by sihing
some have no need to prove anything to anyone, it's called a lack of ego, and strong faith based on one's experience and training that has gotten them solid quality skills, already proven through the various test that are required from those responsible and in charge of their training and instruction as well as one's own standards and internal quality control. If you want to excel in any area of endeavor, you must continue to prove, test, and improve yourself...

Not to others...

But to yourself...

Not for ego..

But to keep up with the evolutionary process that is the natural part of all human efforts.

Fail to do so and you will be left behind by those who do.

[Kevin Bell]

Andrew, Nick

Great stuff very much of interest to me. Keep it coming. I've seen the Emin Boztepe and Gutieerez takes on Antigrappling and like what i see.

Any of you two got clips of what you're talking about to put up???? I for one would be interested to see them.

Kev

[Mark Rasmus]

Originally posted by Vankuen
No OJ it's not such a big deal and one can learn it in a relatively short time...that's why I can't seem to understand one simple thing....

Why no one on here can just friggin admit that wing chun simply does not have any ground game. Period. It's like the people here are almost afraid...as if they're going to turn to dust the minute they say : "no...wing chun does not have any training in "this" area of fighting."


Hi Vankuen,
A few years (mid90`s)back I got a call from a friend asking me to sponsor a seminar for a visiting prominent WT instructor.
I happily agreed and let all the local wingchun schools know about it. On the day I thought I was at BJJ seminar!
He had everyone doing what looked like Wing Chun, doing drills from various ground positions, very effective and spurred a new whole realm of exploration.
The circuluum was very organised with a wide range of counter drills from each ground fighting position.
So I think there is a segment of the Wing Chun world developing this facet, it may take a couple generation to catch to up to the level of ground skill that the gracies have, but I think Wing Chun principles in Ground fighting has the potential to surpass BJJ in reality no rules fighting.
Just another View
Mark Rasmus

http://au.geocities.com/markrasmus/retreat.html

[Ultimatewingchun]

"but I think Wing Chun principles in Ground fighting has the potential to surpass BJJ in reality no rules fighting." (Mark Rasmus)


Well when you consider that in NHB events BJJ people also use striking and kicking...then your theory does not hold water. While it's true that certain Wing Chun principles and techniques can be useful while grappling on the ground (I use them myself)...the fact is that Wing Chun is not a grappling art...and will NEVER surpass BJJ, or Catch Wrestling, or Sambo, or Greco-Roman, or Judo, or any other grappling system...ON THE GROUND. There is not enough leverage - when on the ground - for a striking art to prevail against a grappling art. Grappling arts are made for the ground - and for standing fighting at the range where strikes can't be made effectively...because there is not enough space.

You can take anti-grappling moves only so far - and no further.

[Mark Rasmus]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
...because there is not enough space.
You can take anti-grappling moves only so far - and no further.

You may be right....
We play a game called tiger claw. The rules are simple, find the eye, throat or groin with the claw in the grapple on the ground from different positions. I have played with some good BJJ people, not great but good. In grappling I am a nobody. So if I can hold my own, somebody who spent a few hours on the matt every day for a few years would do much better. Just train the tiger claw, squeeze the tennis ball when you drive the car to work and make your fingers like steel. Obviously there is allot more to it than that, but its a start.
and I may be wrong and you may be right....
Regards
Mark

[AmanuJRY]

I agree with Victor, WC skills can't surpass Grappling skills ON THE GROUND. Most grappling arts have spent as many years developing the techniques and training methods for grappling as WC has for it's game (stand-up/striking).

But it seems the idea of 'anti-grappling' has been pinned as being a form of grappling or has incorporated aspects of grappling arts. IMO, 'anti-grappling' would be a set of tactics designed to PREVENT a person from grappling (of which I believe WC has many).

For the inevitable 'what if' (what if they already have you in a hold, lock, taken you to ground.....etc.) the idea of 'anti-grappling' has failed and you are now grappling, and the one who has more flight time or better training methods will prevail.

Besides, chi sau looks funny when you're rolling around on the ground.;) :D

[anerlich]

"Just train the tiger claw, squeeze the tennis ball when you drive the car to work and make your fingers like steel. Obviously there is allot more to it than that, but its a start."

This is hardly news in grappling or groundfighting circles. Grip training is done by many competitive grapplers, probably with more commitment than most WCers. A strong grip is a HUGE asset to a grappler (or any MAist for that matter).

Many train to add such "dirt" to their delivery systems. on the ground. Check out Gene Lebell's Grappling Master for some graphic illustrations of illegal techniques such as that you mention.

Kimura, the great Japanese Judoka who gave his name to the lower figure 4 arm lock, and who broke Helio GRacie's arm in a challenge match, had the nickname "groin squeezer", for reasons fairly easy to guess.

The old BJJ saying: he who controls, bites. The guy who controls his opponent is the one who can deliver the gouge, rip or tiger claw with greatest effectiveness.

I wish MAists would learn from each other, rather than trying to come up with ways to make WC beat BJJ - and these ARE recent innovations, mostly by Emin - just becaue Emin and the Gracies had a silly misunderstanding some years ago.

"but I think Wing Chun principles in Ground fighting has the potential to surpass BJJ in reality no rules fighting"

Until someone pulls it off in a major competitive event, potential is all that there will be (in the opinion of some, anyway).

While people could be experimenting with and possibly "improving" WC for ground use, BJJers and other groundfighters have innovated for the last 50-odd years, and will continue to innovate. While WC is moving ahead, so are they. Arguably, innovation and evolution is easier, faster and more effective in non-traditional arts like BJJ and Western grappling.

I don't really care if WC beats BJJ or vice versa. I do both , so whatever happens I win.

[Mark Rasmus]

Originally posted by anerlich
I don't really care if WC beats BJJ or vice versa. I do both , so whatever happens I win.

Hi Andrew,
I enjoyed hearing your comments, you appear more qualified than me to discuss grappling. As you do both arts.
How compatible do you find Bjj and WC, do they blend well in your training or do you find yourself switching mindsets between arts? I have been contemplating sponsoring a few seminars for the club on grappling, but I havent wanted the schools focus to move away from WC.
What are your experiences on this?
Look forward to your reply.
Mark Rasmus

[anerlich]

I answered this n part in an earlier post on this thread. There are some common attributes and qualities, and I used to think that there was a lot of intersection, now I'm moving away from that opinion - there are some areas of intersection, but they are not great.

IMO, its like running and swimming. No matter how good a runner you are, you still have to learn to swim from the word go. Saying "a truly excellent runner should be able to prevail in the water" or "you can adapt the way you run to be able to keep up with champion swimmers", just doesn't hold water (sorry, the bad pun was irresistible).

The compatibility of the two arts concernes me less than whether as a combination they cover as wide a range of situations as possible. Arguably, if they are too compatible, they might be too much alike and have the same weaknesses.

NHB and MMA fighters are a pretty pragmatic bunch. They don't stick with boxing, MT and BJJ because of lineage loyalties, traditions, and they're not out there trying to fight for the "purity" of these styles.

If someone could demonstrate to the MMA community that WC principles were superior to what they are doing, they'd pick it up in a flash. There's money involved (including plenty for any successful WC'er) and STRONG desires to win. That (demonsrtation of WC superiority) is yet to happen for some reason.

BJJ practitioners borrow, adapt, and steal techniques and entire methodologies for each other, adapting them or even casting them away if their opponents devise counter strategies.

Too many WCers won't change or adapt because they place their faith in doctrines set down by people long dead, and are quick to call innovators or those seeking different paths heretics, charlatans and imposters. Some claim to be Buddhists, Taoists or seekers after enlightenment, but their talk is all ego. This happens in boxing and BJJ too, but in an environment where regular bouts and challenges are the name of the game, pragmatism generally trounces dogma.

Not all or even most, but some. Even one is too many.

Which approach is more likely to meet the challenges of changing times?

[Mark Rasmus]

Originally posted by anerlich
Too many WCers won't change or adapt because they place their faith in doctrines set down by people long dead, and are quick to call innovators or those seeking different paths heretics, charlatans and imposters. Some claim to be Buddhists, Taoists or seekers after enlightenment, but their talk is all ego. This happens in boxing and BJJ too, but in an environment where regular bouts and challenges are the name of the game, pragmatism generally trounces dogma.


Hi Andrew,
The reason I think most people dont want to change WC to a ground fighting art, is they have the idea that it is too dangerous to go to the ground. Because in a real fight, the guy you are fighting will most probaly have a friend who is going to kick your head in. One on One in a controlled environment, BJJ will most probaly win 9/10 times.
But if I reflect on the years of doing bouncing and the confrontations that I had had, I would be in big trouble in most of them if I went to the ground. I am a big guy and every fight I have had in my youth outside of work, was against a group. This reinforced my view on stand up fighting.

> "Some claim to be Buddhists, Taoists or seekers after enlightenment, but their talk is all ego."AN

This is a bit harsh and I presume you are targeting it at me due to the posts I put up on Buddhism and my link to a Buddhist website.
But you are right!
It is all ego(unless you already attained enlightenment)
We all operate out of ego! The difference is that the Buddhist or Taoist is dedicating their training to mastering and refining the ego, the competitor is in alll probablity going the opposite direction? But I might be wrong.

I believe Wing Chun is an art in a continuous state of evolution so the incorporation of ground fighting is inevitable. It will just take a few generations to refine.

Just another View
Mark Rasmus

http://au.geocities.com/markrasmus/retreat.html

[Ultimatewingchun]

"The reason I think most people dont want to change WC to a ground fighting art, is they have the idea that it is too dangerous to go to the ground..."

WHO said anything about CHANGING Wing Chun to a ground fighting art?

Adding ground skills to the Wing Chun arsenal...sure.

Adding standing grappling skills to the Wing chun arsenal...sure.

As to avoiding the ground in real life situations - since he may have friends in the vicinity....that's just common sense.

BUT FIGHTING ON THE GROUND when you have to - because that's where the fight took you - like it or not...or grappling in the standing clinch because that's where the fight took you...

these skills are an absolute must.

Why?

Because this is the reality that we face today - that's why.

Adaptation is the name of the game.

[SAAMAG]

Originally posted by Mark Rasmus
Hi Andrew,
The reason I think most people dont want to change WC to a ground fighting art, is they have the idea that it is too dangerous to go to the ground. Because in a real fight, the guy you are fighting will most probaly have a friend who is going to kick your head in. One on One in a controlled environment, BJJ will most probaly win 9/10 times.
Honestly Mark, is there ever a range of fighting that is "safe"? Fighting is fighting is fighting. There should be no bias in it. All the wars past, the greatest warriors fought, and fought however they needed to in order to win the battle, they didn't try to conform the combat to a specialized method...it is what it is...and it is the fighter's way to be as best prepared as possible. Limiting yourself to only one method is the act of a blinded fool.

But if I reflect on the years of doing bouncing and the confrontations that I had had, I would be in big trouble in most of them if I went to the ground. I am a big guy and every fight I have had in my youth outside of work, was against a group. This reinforced my view on stand up fighting.
The fight doesn't have to necessarily go to the ground...however I don't recall too many bouncers being allowed to pound on the clientel. (sp) Best I recall most of the bouncers I knew all had to use some sort of submission or controlling technique to "escort" their problems to the door. Not pound them into submission.

> "Some claim to be Buddhists, Taoists or seekers after enlightenment, but their talk is all ego."

This is a bit harsh and I presume you are targeting it at me due to the posts I put up on Buddhism and my link to a Buddhist website.
But you are right!
It is all ego(unless you already attained enlightenment)
We all operate out of ego! The difference is that the Buddhist or Taoist is dedicating their training to mastering and refining the ego, the competitor is in alll probablity going the opposite direction? But I might be wrong.
Relax, He's not talking about you in particular I don't think, he's talking about all the people on this forum who refuse to face reality but instead stay nice and snug in their little bubbles or stories and lineage and rules for something that has none.

I believe Wing Chun is an art in a continuous state of evolution so the incorporation of ground fighting is inevitable. It will just take a few generations to refine.
True...it looks as if it's going to be a loooong time before people of the traditional arts will come to see the light

Just another View
Mark Rasmus

http://au.geocities.com/markrasmus/retreat.html

[Mark Rasmus]

Hi,

Heres a bit of trivia for you. Recently, one of the Gracies girls came over here to Japan. She choked out a very egotistical jujitsu instructor on TV. Having his ass kisked by a girl.... Didnt go down too well with Japanese pride. The interesting part is she was exceptionally feminine. It was so funny to see the change from the cute girl in the hot red evening dress turn into the BJJ mauler for the challenge match.

Mark

[YungChun]

(sorry for cross post but similar topic)

I don't rule out the possibility that the Wing Chun system has potential for groundwork, especially since so many here are so sure it doesn't. :D Wing Chun concepts are not limited to any particular method or way, Wing Chun teaches, more than anything else, to use what is most economical in a given situation; WC structure is created by applying the concepts to the body’s available tools, we think, just for standup – this is what has created the system’s tools and techniques, well if you can apply these concepts to create a standup system then you can tweak them to create WC Ground & Pound IMO – that assumes the brilliant founders of this system never considered groundwork necessary. :confused:

In any case all system concepts are sound and may be applied even to things that don’t fit in with the traditional WC paradigm; Bruce applied WC concepts to everything he did, WC or not, including large circular techniques that are not nearly efficient enough for Wing Chun to call her own.

These concepts IMO can be applied to anything, something I’ll be looking into, including WC Ground & Pound, which some people have already been working on apparently. Anyone seen that new NHB Wing Chun DVD, it supposedly has lots of G&P ala WC...

[AndrewS]

AndrewN,

as far as overlap goes. I think one of the most difficult things for me to reconcile between WT and some (very good) BJJ that I've picked up is that there is a certain BJJ game that favors being 'like an anaconda'- a slow smashing game, which favors incremental improvements in position, muscular endurance, and static strength. This is antithetical to what I'm trying to develop in my standup game (obviously), and while occasionally necessary (I'm thinking of the 5 minutes I spent with my partner in half-guard yesterday, playing with his head and preventing his pass until I could get double underhooks for the reversal) these static moments seem to develop some bad habits. Part of that is perhaps not having an immediate solution to a problem, but some of it, is that sometimes, in grappling, you just wind up tied up looking for something, and trying to be in constant motion will just put you in a worse position.

I'm not stating this well, just trying to think it through a little by writing.

Andrew

[anerlich]

Andrew S,

I know what you mean. While a fast BJJ game can be almost overwhelming if you are on the receiving end, the speed differential between standup striking and grappling, generally, is huge.

"well if you can apply these concepts to create a standup system then you can tweak them to create WC Ground & Pound IMO"

Nothing to stop you, I guess. Whether starting from first principles in a groundfighting unrelated art when BJJ and Vale Tudo have been doing it for the greater part of last century is pragmatic (which I hope Wing Chun is in the eyes of some at least), requires consideration.

There's mony and fame for the taking for anyone that can make WC principles work in the NHB arena ... but for some reason this has yet to happen.

"that assumes the brilliant founders of this system never considered groundwork necessary."

That's too big a leap of faith and logic IMO. Perhaps it was totally overlooked rather than discarded, or perhaps the founders were not the transcendental geniuses some like to paint them to be. If the founders of WC are geniuses, then people such as Kano, Helio, Carlos Sr and Rickson deserve such honorifics every bit as much.

"Bruce applied WC concepts to everything he did, WC or not, including large circular techniques that are not nearly efficient enough for Wing Chun to call her own."

I think that's highly debatable. Bruce was moving away from rather than deeper into WC toward the end of his life. WC people seem to coopt Bruce as a poster boy when it suits them, trash him when it doesn't.

"is they have the idea that it is too dangerous to go to the ground"

Indeed it is. Thinking you will always have a choice is IMO even more dangerous.

"This is a bit harsh and I presume you are targeting it at me due to the posts I put up on Buddhism and my link to a Buddhist website."

I've not read the posts you mention. I was thinking of others of far greater commercial profile when I wrote that. I have no problem with Buddhism, only those who abuse it to further personal agenda.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Terrific interchanges between the two of you...Andrew and Andrew.

Much food for thought.

One of the reasons why I prefer Catch to BJJ is precisely because the slow anaconda game has two major drawbacks, as I see it.

1) There is almost always "something" you can do to facilitate the fight - WITHOUT opening yourself up to defeat...instead of being in a static ground position for "5 minutes" or more...and again I'm going to say that there are ways to pass a guard or submit the guard player that I don't see being used very often in UFC, PRIDE, etc...

as well as relatively fast ways to get back up to one's feet from the guard...or to a ground position that is more controlling.

(And again I'm going to refer people to Sakuraba's grappling game - he's always in motion - and has never been submitted).


2) You can't fight in a static ground position for "5 minutes" or more without BEGGING for someone else to get involved; and if it's a friend of your opponent's...LOL.

[old jong]

You can't fight in a static ground position for "5 minutes" or more without BEGGING for someone else to get involved; and if it's a friend of your opponent's...LOL.

Is this why we never saw a Gracie fight clip that was not involving a dozen of Gracie brothers/cousins/uncles etc, surrounding the fight area?...;)

[sihing]

Originally posted by AndrewS
AndrewN,

as far as overlap goes. I think one of the most difficult things for me to reconcile between WT and some (very good) BJJ that I've picked up is that there is a certain BJJ game that favors being 'like an anaconda'- a slow smashing game, which favors incremental improvements in position, muscular endurance, and static strength. This is antithetical to what I'm trying to develop in my standup game (obviously), and while occasionally necessary (I'm thinking of the 5 minutes I spent with my partner in half-guard yesterday, playing with his head and preventing his pass until I could get double underhooks for the reversal) these static moments seem to develop some bad habits. Part of that is perhaps not having an immediate solution to a problem, but some of it, is that sometimes, in grappling, you just wind up tied up looking for something, and trying to be in constant motion will just put you in a worse position.

I'm not stating this well, just trying to think it through a little by writing.

Andrew

Although I'm not studying BJJ or any grappling specific art, I've noticed the same thing in my observations, only exemption is when one is far superior to the other (I downloaded a home movie video of Rickson Gracie sparring all the students attending one of his seminars. It was quite a site to see him taking everyone out one by one in a minute or less the majority of the time.) The thing I have noticed with grappling and why this happens is that on the ground you can control you opponents actions much easier than standing, especially if your skilled in it, just due to mobilty issues. If your on the ground, there is little mobility, whereas if your standing and getting pummelled, you can always "Run" away. WC concept and philosophy is similar to the ground grappling in that it tries to do the samething standing up, limit what the opponent can do by trapping his arms and striking while at the same time trapping the footwork. This is much harder to do just for the reason I gave above, anyone can just run away when it is attempted.

James

[YungChun]

Originally posted by anerlich

"Bruce applied WC concepts to everything he did, WC or not, including large circular techniques that are not nearly efficient enough for Wing Chun to call her own."

I think that's highly debatable. Bruce was moving away from rather than deeper into WC toward the end of his life. WC people seem to coopt Bruce as a poster boy when it suits them, trash him when it doesn't.


Not really.

This is very clear upon review of what JKD is and how it came about as well as Bruce's writings on the subject.

Bruce expressed thoughts on refining and tightening up Boxing movements, he felt they 'lacked directness' and were expressed in an exagerated fashion with too much wasted movement. He attempted to streamline them.

He created the JKD Hook Kick by applying WC concepts to the Round Kick.

He applied these concepts using tools from Wing Chun and Fencing to create his Lead Straight.

He applied the same concepts to the traditional side kick.

Those who sparred with him or observed such training have commented many times that Bruce would play around a lot with different things, but when it got serious, he would stop hit, enter and trap, I can relate.. :D

Bruce was not allowed to teach Wing Chun, he also hadn't finished the system, so he adapted all the theory he had to what was available to him, and he created JKD, The Way of the Intercepting Fist, essentially encapsulating Wing Chun theory in the name JKD itself.

JKD is generally thought of as a Wing Chun derivative. Dan Inosanto has commented many times that the core art of Bruce's JKD was Wing Chun. Dan goes on to say that he applied more of a FMA core to what is now his JKD.

When Bruce came to the US he was a Wing Chun guy bottom line, that's what he had trained, bringing all the strengths and weaknesses that comes with it. He continued to grow and develop but clearly the driving concepts and theory applied to his study and creative process was very much Wing Chun.

After all, that's where Bruce came from and, after all, these are some of the most thoughtful and powerful combat concepts ever devised, spawned from thousands of years of combative, mathematical and philosophical, et al study in China – this is what drives this system, the concepts are unbeatable, but it's up to those training to put them to good use and that's what Bruce did.

Anyone who thinks basic Wing Chun concepts can’t be applied to X, where X is come kind of physical dynamic with a tangible objective doesn’t get the concepts IMO.

Try and reinvent the wheel? No way! Try and replace a wooden horse and buggy wheel with a steel belted radial – Yes, any day!

[Ultimatewingchun]

YungChun:

That was an excellent analysis of what Bruce Lee was all about.

And yes...you can apply Wing Chun principles and concepts to other arts.

But what struck me the most about your post was how much CROSSTRAINING Bruce did.

And when things got serious - he DID always put a Wing Chun spin on what he was doing...(except when he was grappling - because the ground changes just about everything)...

but the finished product (JKD) was clearly much more than any "conventional" Wing Chun.

[sihing]

I've always believed that Bruce Cross trained for a few reasons. First, he had incomplete knowledge of the Wing Chun system so he had to fill in the gaps anyway he could. Secondly, he moved to a place (America) that had allot more diversity and choices in regards to just about everything you could think of compared to Hong Kong Martial Arts included, and this was perfect for Bruce's curious personality. Three, Bruce was a free spirit and was not a follower and also he wanted to be the best or top dog, so he created his own system and became founder of something.

Bruce was obsessesed with Martial Arts in general and was a virtual encyclopedia of information, so it would be natural that he would stray away from Wing Chun the more he was exposed to other things. But like YungChun said, and I have read it also, when things got serious he reverted back to his foundation, enter, trap and straight-line hit...


James

[Ultimatewingchun]

"But like YungChun said, and I have read it also, when things got serious he reverted back to his foundation, enter, trap and straight-line hit..." (James)


SPENT A WEEK talking to and observing Danny Inosanto back in 1979, when he visited Moy Yat's school here in NYC. (In 1979 there was only one JKD school anywhere - and it was Dan's).

Yes... Dan confirmed that Bruce used quite a bit of Wing Chun when the chips were down...

and NO...it wasn't just his curious and expansive personality that led him to study various arts here in the land of diversity (USA).

As a streetfighter, Bruce understood first and foremost that no one system had all the answers to combat.

[sihing]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"But like YungChun said, and I have read it also, when things got serious he reverted back to his foundation, enter, trap and straight-line hit..." (James)


SPENT A WEEK talking to and observing Danny Inosanto back in 1979, when he visited Moy Yat's school here in NYC. (In 1979 there was only one JKD school anywhere - and it was Dan's).

Yes... Dan confirmed that Bruce used quite a bit of Wing Chun when the chips were down...

and NO...it wasn't just his curious and expansive personality that led him to study various arts here in the land of diversity (USA).

As a streetfighter, Bruce understood first and foremost that no one system had all the answers to combat.

Then it would have been interesting if Bruce hadn't died and did go visit GM Cheung in Australia like he was supposed to (apparently Bruce told Cheung a week before he died that after filming The Game of Death, he was going to visit Cheung in Australia and that he'd better be ready) . What do you think would have happened Victor? Cheung was bigger than Bruce, just a fast (remember they timed him at 9 punches a sec. when he was 45 yrs old), in great shape, and very skilled in his TWC. Too bad fate had other plans.

But you know it all and have all the answers for all the questions so disregard this post everyone.



James

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by YungChun
... after all, these are some of the most thoughtful and powerful combat concepts ever devised, spawned from thousands of years of combative, mathematical and philosophical, et al study in China – this is what drives this system, the concepts are unbeatable, but it's up to those training to put them to good use and that's what Bruce did. The concepts are unbeatable...
The most thoughtful and powerful combat concepts ever developed...
Don't add grappling into your mix because you will be upsetting the mix and disrespecting the WC founders...
WC is a complete system...
WC is more effective, efficient, and to the point than all other systems...

Some of you guys act as if WC were your wife or kids.

[AndrewS]

The first words posted on this thread . . .

<Let's keep the wanking to a minimum and maybe use this thread to actually discuss some *useful* stuff. >

For once, maybe try to ask the question before you post- 'am I saying something of any use'.

My contribution- D*MN! but ATH squats, front squats, OH squats, and snatch-squat presses build your guard. Haven't been rolling much the last few months, but I've been lifting a lot, and Saturday morning's session revealed a lot of physical weak links had been corrected by my lifting.

Later,

Andrew

[Ultimatewingchun]

"But you know it all and have all the answers for all the questions so disregard this post everyone." (James)



Out of respect for Andrew's request, James...I'm not going to respond to this.

And I'm more resolved than ever to ignore your posts from here on in.

[kiddle]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
The concepts are unbeatable...
The most thoughtful and powerful combat concepts ever developed...
Don't add grappling into your mix because you will be upsetting the mix and disrespecting the WC founders...
WC is a complete system...
WC is more effective, efficient, and to the point than all other systems...

Some of you guys act as if WC were your wife or kids.

Maybe people haev confused confidence and faith. Some gals have faith in their teacher or teachers teacher and others develop confidence by successfully applying their theories. I'd rather develop confidence by finding out whats applicable.

repeat failure and refinement until you find whats applicable. And by the way, I got a boxing friend to help me with jabs in exchange for helping him with some of his boxing drills. I tried a technique that was posted on another thread and couldn't get it to work for me. It came down to 2 movements to counter his 1 VERY FAST movement. heh. I got lit up. gonna have to try something else.

[anerlich]

I still think the Bruce thing is debatable, like all forms of history - especially that of WC and JKD. There's no advocacy of using WC on the ground in Tao of JKD or the recently published collection of his writings, though both contain sections on Gene LeBell-style ground grappling and submissions, and the latter quite a few takedowns that are obviously not WC-derived.

In any case, he's been dead nearly thirty years now and I say let him RIP.

"Anyone who thinks basic Wing Chun concepts can’t be applied to X, where X is come kind of physical dynamic with a tangible objective doesn’t get the concepts IMO."

There's a difference between "able to be applied" and "most suitable". Opinions vary. If it's so great on the ground, teach it to MMA fighters and start raking in the bucks.

"Try and reinvent the wheel? No way! Try and replace a wooden horse and buggy wheel with a steel belted radial – Yes, any day! "

Which is the horse and buggy and which the steel belted radial in this case? A topline Ferrari will destroy horse drawn transportation and just about anything else on the road, but if you try to get it to perform functions best performed by a submarine you are, er, sunk.

"Don't add grappling into your mix because you will be upsetting the mix and disrespecting the WC founders"

LOL.

[Edmund]

Since staying on the ground too long is not a great idea, the emphasis for street fighting applications would be on strategies to get them down and get you up: e.g. sweep or take their back from the guard.

Similarly for standing, aside from the "run away" idea, often getting pummelled is a good reason to tie them up in a clinch of some sort. The clinch position is also a place you don't want to stay too long - your opponent's friends could take the opportunity to start laying into you while you're tied up. So you'd emphasize ideas that keep them tied up but don't allow them to take a strong tie up of their own.




Originally posted by sihing
If your on the ground, there is little mobility, whereas if your standing and getting pummelled, you can always "Run" away. WC concept and philosophy is similar to the ground grappling in that it tries to do the samething standing up, limit what the opponent can do by trapping his arms and striking while at the same time trapping the footwork. This is much harder to do just for the reason I gave above, anyone can just run away when it is attempted.

James

[anerlich]

"What do you think would have happened Victor?"

Nobody really knows, though it would have been a fascinating meeting, no doubt.

Dan Inosanto had a fair bit to do with William Cheung over the years, but still elected to take JKD down a different path.

What all this has to do with the thread topic escapes me, unless the "what if" bout had occurred, and both Bruce and W Cheung had elected to fight on the ground. A most unlikely scenario.

[sihing]

Originally posted by anerlich
"What do you think would have happened Victor?"

Nobody really knows, though it would have been a fascinating meeting, no doubt.

Dan Inosanto had a fair bit to do with William Cheung over the years, but still elected to take JKD down a different path.

What all this has to do with the thread topic escapes me, unless the "what if" bout had occurred, and both Bruce and W Cheung had elected to fight on the ground. A most unlikely scenario.

Yes I agree it would have been a fascinating encounter. Sorry to have taken the thread off topic, please continue on....

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Andrew Nerlich:

This is the FORWARD that Dan inosanto wrote in the first book that William Cheung ever wrote: BIL JEE...

"It is a privilege to write an introduction for Wing Chun Bil Jee, The Deadly Art of Thrusting Fingers by Master William Cheung (Cheung Chuk Hing), who is considered the number one fighter in the Wing Chun clan by the majority of its practitioners.

My training in Wing Chun began in 1964 under the late Bruce Lee. During this training, Lee often told many stories about Cheung's prowess as a street fighter in Hong Kong. When he spoke of Bill Cheung, he spoke with respect.

It was Bill Cheung, his senior in the Wing Chun system who helped train him to win the Hong Kong championships in 1957, and from whom he learned some of the concepts that later led to the creation of his Jeet Kune Do.

After witnessing Master Cheung demonstrate and perform Wing Chun, I stand in awe of his style. He is the number one authority in the original Wing Chun system, which contains superior footwork and entry techniques that the modified version lacks.
I consider Wing Chun Bil Jee, The Deadly Art of Thrusting Fingers a great contribution, not only to the Wing Chun style and its practitioners, but to the martial arts world in general." (Dan Inosanto)


And Dan also worked with weapons against William Cheung in the photos within William's book a few years later: KUNG FU BUTTERFLY SWORDS.

And Ted Wong co-wrote a book with William Cheung years later comparing TWC and JKD.

As you know.

But you're right - Dan still chose to stay on the JKD path he was on after his meeting William and his exposure to TWC.

And my opinion about that it is this: Dan was committed to the JKD path of crosstraining and amalgamation of styles.

William Cheung was not. He has added some moves here-and-there through the years that come from other styles - but not to the extent that I would consider TWC to be a MMA.

And as much as I respect my sifu William Cheung and the TWC style - I think that Dan's philosophical approach is better in the final analysis.

Because it covers more fighting possibilities.

And I'm sure you agree.

[anerlich]

Victor:

I have all those books!

And yes, I agree.

And, dare I say it, as well as being the titular head of original Jun Fan JKD Dan Inosanto is also a BJJ Black Belt.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Andrew:

I didn't know that about Dan.

Good for him!

[Vajramusti]

Forewords and even books dont always give a clear picture
of what people really think- in this case Inosanto. he generally shows respect to most other good martial artists he interacts with.

But we are drifting away from the thread topic-dont you think?

I know that we differ on this. But generally its a bad idea to go to the ground. Sometimes one may not have a choice
due to incomplete training in wc compared to the other fella in his/her art- or
slippery ground or shoes or multiple attackers. Its important to get up as soon as possible- till then relaxed wing chun
controlling motions and strikes can still work. The strikes that i have seen by some wing chunners on the ground dont seem to be very powerful. Seems like repeating the same strikes again and again. Missing is short power.

Of course it has to be practiced and experimented with but
completely shifting to learning jj ona mat is playing the jj game. Also- time is better spent improving and adjusting one's wing chun for serious wing chun folks- rather than arresting continued wing chun development and starting from scratch in another art.

This is not just theory- experiential as well. Many things can be used. Depending on circumstances the simultaneous neck pulling hand properly done combined witha move or strike with the other hand. And, proper relaxation and adjustments and not straightening out the elbow
avoids arm bars in the process too.. Strong ygkym leg training comes in handy on the ground. Legs have an important role on the ground- hips do- hands do. Good wing chun trains moves for all partsof the body. Its not always self evident.
And yes - it can ad should be experimented with without sacrificing the full spectrum of wing chun development.
Sorry-gotta go w/o proof reading for typos.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Forewords and even books dont always give a clear picture
of what people really think- in this case Inosanto. he generally shows respect to most other good martial artists he interacts with. "


LEAVE IT to you, Joy...to try and throw doubt upon Dan Inosanto's words - since they praise William Cheung.

God...what a shock.

[anerlich]

in this case Inosanto. he generally shows respect to most other good martial artists he interacts with.

Indeed he does, we could follow his example, and respect *him* by taking what he says as an honest opinion rather than his just blowing sunshine up William Cheung's posterior cavity, as you seem to imply.

[Vajramusti]

as you seem to imply.

__________________

Didnt imply that at all. Inosanto himself moves on-he interacts with people and then moves on- did that with Lee,
Moy Yat, Cheung as well. He evolves too.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Didn't imply that at all." (Joy)

WHAT A PHONEY.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
in this case Inosanto. he generally shows respect to most other good martial artists he interacts with. Dan is a super nice guy. He gives respect to pretty much everybody. This is not meant as a put down to him or anyone that he might endorse, but he always has something nice to say about everyone, whether they are good or not so good.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Vajramusti
But generally its a bad idea to go to the ground. Really? It's generally a bad idea to go to the ground?
If you are a groundfighter and there are no "bystanders" around, it's a huge advantage to take the fight to the ground.
If you are concerned that he might have a weapon and you are familiar with groundfighting and weapons, it is a huge advantage to take the fight to the ground.
If you are in law enforement and you need to hook up a big, strong, athletic suspect who is resisting, it is a huge advantage to take him to the ground if you have training in that aspect of a confrontation.


Originally posted by Vajramusti
relaxed wing chun
controlling motions and strikes can still work. The strikes that i have seen by some wing... Of course it has to be practiced and experimented with but...
Many things can be used....
...strike with the other hand. And, proper relaxation and adjustments and not straightening..
.. out the elbow
.
....ground. Legs have an important role on the ground- hips do- hands do.
This is not just theory- experiential as well.If it's not just theory, which groundfighters have to tested it against?

[Vajramusti]

WHAT A PHONEY.
---------------------------------Labelling ignored.
Others see KF's good characterization of Inosanto in the next post.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Labelling accurate.

And yes...KF does make a good point about Inosanto.

But it's one thing to say that someone is "good"- and let it go at that...It's quite another thing to spell it out in very clear detail exactly why one is in "awe" of William Cheung's TWC system.

Which is precisely the point that you...Joy...was attempting to obscure.