A disappointing Observation

[sihing]

Although only a fairly new observer to this forum, with only under a year of exposure, I'm finding a sense of superiority by those on here that in one way claim to be Wing Chun practitioners but in another sense don't really feel that way just for the fact that they think they know something all of us "Tradionalist or Theoriatians Non Fighters" don't know. Once the labels start to fly then you know the Ego is talking. I found this forum by a reference and was initially drawn to it to refute some comments made by another on this forum, but after some investigation I found it a place I could learn from and debate a few things in general, but for the last few months I feel like I have to actually defend Wing Chun's worthiness as a fighting/combat art. Why is this so? Because lots on here think most WC practitioners are lazy? OR Because Wing Chun lacks training or skills in certain ranges of combat, just like the one's the MMA want us to learn, but fail to see there limitations also? How can anyone know exactly what thousands of other people are doing, especially when it comes to something as personal as one's choice of Martial Art? It's great to debate and discuss differences and commonalities, but the general discussions on here usually end up being an "I'm right and your wrong" debate if favour of Wing Chun's weakness instead of strengths, to which makes us all look like idiots. Regardless of what one has experienced, no one has all the answers to everyone's questions because no one know's the individual experiences that all of us have had, and even if you did it would be hard to prove on an internet forum like this, person to person is the only way to really influence others to a great degree, which is probably why the May event was first conceived in the first place, but as expected a few on here have taken charge and re-directed the original path of the event (a get together for us to learn more and appreciate one another better) and made it into what they wanted, a sparring/fighting/lets find out who's who event with this rule and that, and we will only fight at the level you want to, whatever that means. What will that prove if the full intention on one's skills may never be allowed to be seen? And if the skills are let loose, then Ego's will be bruised for sure.

It's disappointing to say the least as we should be pulling together instead of falling apart like we are. Although I don't really think this forum will have that much deep impact on the future of Wing Chun and its popularity, it just seems a real shame to see the lack of respect shown for such a great MA as is shown on this forum at times


James

[KPM]

While we are posting "disappointing observations", here is mine. Originally posted on a different thread. But it seems appropriate here:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Matrix
James,
That's the way I see it as well.

If we're going to say as Airdrawndagger suggests, that there's a WC "good" and a boxing "good", and that one "good" is not as good as the other, then we're playing word games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---I agree with you guys as well. If the implication by some is that "good" boxing is better than "good" Wing Chun, then why haven't they dropped Wing Chun and gone whole-heartedly into boxing? We keep hearing how wonderful MMA training is, so why haven't these same people dropped their Wing Chun and focused on MMA? I agree with something that James said awhile back as well. He pointed out that it sure seems strange that you can come to a Wing Chun forum and end up having to defend Wing Chun! This is probably a skewed impression, but it sometimes seems that there are some here that don't think much of Wing Chun, but still practice it and feel like they need to change it! Why not just skip the Wing Chun and focus on boxing, or kickboxing, or BJJ, or catch wrestling, etc? If Wing Chun is so awful.....why continue to practice it? If boxing or MMA has all the answers, then why not pursue that? The typical neophyte to martial arts that happened upon this forum with the intent to find out more about Wing Chun would probably go away thinking "that's obviously not something I want to study!" Terence laughed at me on another thread because I didn't like the "tone." Well....there is a difference between saying that "Wing Chun is a great martial art and here are some things to consider that can make it better" and saying "Wing Chun is worthless and not a martial art at all unless you are doing these specific things....." We get too much of the later attitude and not enough of the former. It does make a difference. The "in your face" attitude may be warranted on occasion to make a point and wake people up, but to have it here day after day in darn near every thread gets real old real fast and people simple start to ignore it. If you scan through the most recent posts you will find many of the "regulars" missing. Coincidence? Or did they just get tired of the recent tone in the forum?

Keith

[t_niehoff]

**It's not WCK -- the method -- that is in question, but the attitudes and the associated training methods prevalent in what I call "the culture of WCK" (or most TCMAs). That's two different things. And the "labels" of nonswimmer or theoretican/nonfihgter reflect those prevailing attitudes/approach towards training. I can't make anyone a nonswimmer; the *fact* they don't swim is what makes them a nonswimmer. Recognizing that fact isn't "labeling".

**Criticising these attitudes is not a criticism of WCK; nor does that criticism weaken WCK. A fighter only gets better by having their weaknesses (continually) pointed out to him. Those prevalent attitudes seriously limit one's potential for development, and only by recognizing them and changing can one make significant progress. Ignoring those weaknesses, putting our heads in the sand, will have certain consequences.

KPM wrote:

We keep hearing how wonderful MMA training is, so why haven't these same people dropped their Wing Chun and focused on MMA?

**One major lesson of NHB fights is that to be a "good" fighter -- that is, successful agaisnt other "good" fighters -- we need to be well-rounded. This is the point of MMA: to become well-rounded (to fill the gaps in one's fighting ability). One doesn't "drop" their BJJ and focus on MMA, for example; rather, one keeps their BJJ and by cross-training (in other arts, hence MMA), they become better, well-rounded fighters. Same with WCK. Does one *need* to cross-train? Of course not. There are many people satisfied with just boxing or just doing BJJ or just doing WCK. Yet they recognize the limitations of doing that.

I agree with something that James said awhile back as well. He pointed out that it sure seems strange that you can come to a Wing Chun forum and end up having to defend Wing Chun! This is probably a skewed impression, but it sometimes seems that there are some here that don't think much of Wing Chun, but still practice it and feel like they need to change it! Why not just skip the Wing Chun and focus on boxing, or kickboxing, or BJJ, or catch wrestling, etc? If Wing Chun is so awful.....why continue to practice it? If boxing or MMA has all the answers, then why not pursue that?

**As I said above, it's not WCK that is being criticized, but the attitude of some (most) of its "practitioners".

The typical neophyte to martial arts that happened upon this forum with the intent to find out more about Wing Chun would probably go away thinking "that's obviously not something I want to study!"

**It depends on their goal. If their goal is to really learn and martial art and develop fighting skill (become good swimmers), the prevailing "culture of WCK" will actually prevent it.

Terence laughed at me on another thread because I didn't like the "tone." Well....there is a difference between saying that "Wing Chun is a great martial art and here are some things to consider that can make it better" and saying "Wing Chun is worthless and not a martial art at all unless you are doing these specific things....." We get too much of the later attitude and not enough of the former. It does make a difference.

**But there is a significant difference in *meaning* between your two statements -- the former suggests that what one is doing is good, but there are possible improvements while the latter suggests there are necessary requirements to developing fighting skill.

The "in your face" attitude may be warranted on occasion to make a point and wake people up, but to have it here day after day in darn near every thread gets real old real fast and people simple start to ignore it. If you scan through the most recent posts you will find many of the "regulars" missing. Coincidence? Or did they just get tired of the recent tone in the forum?

**I'm sure some of the theoreticans are tired of the "tone", or more accurately, their attitude (the culture of WCK) being criticized and it being pointed out that there is no evidence to support their beliefs. Persons who fight, who actually *do* WCK, aren't going to be put off by a tone of "prove it" or "where is the evidence". The only persons put off by such a "tone" are those that don't do it, that can't do it, that have no evidence.

[reneritchie]

Because 99% of the people here are more concerned with how others train than how they themselves train :)

[Ali Hamad Rahim]

Who is to blame? Is it the teacher’s fault for promoting wing chun, that it is a invincible art or a least the art that he or she teaches, but when they come down to reality and find out that their wing chun does not work in certain situation, they come cashing down hard from disappointment, and then only they can find the right answers. Is it the way teachers promote students too a higher level when only learning there wing chun from videotape or seminars? The student only sees their sifu once or twice a year and maybe workout with their sifu 10 to 15 min personally (free) when they see him or her. At the seminars most can not afford private lesson with their famous sifu, let alone sponsor a seminar which cost well over $4.000 a visit. But yet still sick out there chest saying that they are a personal student of this or that famous sifu. Do their sifu know that they feel that way about the system that he or she teaches is incomplete, of course not? Because its all about money and promotion. If the sifu finds out how the student feels he may not be around much longer as a top student. Then all of those photos and videos taking at the seminars will not stand up as good promotional gimmicks. That’s what they are “gimmick” when you haven’t learned or cant do anything that you were taught, or even use the system in the street the way it was taught. IF THEY DROP WING CHUN, THEY DROP THE LIGHT ON WHO THEY ARE, FAR AS THEIR “FAMOUS CONNECTION”, THEY ONLY NEED THAT, NOT WING CHUN.

ps.

If you are connected who cares if you can fight or not, all you have too do is talk loud enough, until the walls come falling down. You can’t fix that “the point that you can not fight”, if you try you will only keep hurting yourself. Because the point has been made clear to everyone, but to ones self, and that’s to bad.

Ali Hamad Rahim.

detroitwingchun.com (http://detroitwingchun.com)

[Ultimatewingchun]

Let me tell you what one of my disappointments is, James...

The fact that you talk alot but have posted nothing on the VIDEO FOOTAGE thread that even comes close to reality fighting.

[taltos]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
A fighter only gets better by having their weaknesses (continually) pointed out to him.

Persons who fight, who actually *do* WCK, aren't going to be put off by a tone of "prove it" or "where is the evidence".

The only persons put off by such a "tone" are those that don't do it, that can't do it, that have no evidence.

These are all erroneous misleading statements wrapped in the guise of vague generalizations.

1. A fighter CAN get better in other ways. Having their weaknesses continually pointed out certainly helps, and COULD speed things up, but it is not the ONLY way and pointing out weakness in and of itself does NOTHING unless the fighter actually TRAINS to overcome those weaknesses.

2. I know (personally and on this forum) several people who DO "fight" (whatever that means) and who "DO" Wing Chun, who ARE put off by the confrontational "prove it to me" attitude some display on this forum. To say that those people aren't going to be put off is to once again make vague generalizations, and incorrect ones at that.

3. See number 2, and add to that that I also know people who do not "fight" who could care less about these posts, which blasts yet another hole in those statements.

Wouldn't it be great if people actually made statements that were thought out and... hmmmm... PROVEABLE? Because when someone does the exact same thing that they accuse others of doing it just makes their observations meaningless.

-Levi

[t_niehoff]

Rene,

I don't care how anyone trains or whether they believe their oral tradition or whatever, my concern is about the nature of the *claims* they make: is there support, evidence, proof (results) rather than conjecture, hearsay, belief (theory)?

[sihing]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Rene,

I don't care how anyone trains or whether they believe their oral tradition or whatever, my concern is about the nature of the *claims* they make: is there support, evidence, proof (results) rather than conjecture, hearsay, belief (theory)?

Everything is heresay on a internet forum. When someone relates fact, as it means to them personally, to others it is heresay.

James

[sihing]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Let me tell you what one of my disappointments is, James...

The fact that you talk alot but have posted nothing on the VIDEO FOOTAGE thread that even comes close to reality fighting.

It's coming Victor, but it's not the top priority on my list.

James

[PaulH]

I agree with Levi somewhat. I'm here mostly for fun, conversations, and education. Lately it has become more a hilltop fight for some beenies of thought. One of the incontestable sign of maturity is the ability to turn down the volume knob. =)

[Ernie]

Or for some a Ferrari in a glass boxes!

The most disappointing thing for of late [in response to James]
Is the fact that we are so polarized as a group in general?
The fact that we all agree that the wing Chun system in theory and on paper is a truly wonderful and thought provoking view of what combat could be.
Yet when it comes to application and training methods people scurry in all directions.

Some seem very enamored with building this historical prototype from some ancient blue print of what supposedly was efficient and effective, refining every detail, perfecting every curve, carving away until they can sit back and admire the form and design, and claim some form of accomplishment.

Sifu, master, or grandmaster of the perfect ship in the glass bottle.

A ship that’s very essence was born by a need to survive rough and turbulent seas. To fight, maim, murder, structurally to cut glide, borrow power and have short-range explosive weapons.
A ship that could adapt and be self sufficient, navigate the unknown and make home from each journey with new discoveries, wiser and richer from the experience.

The ship builders could build better ships based on the information gained from each of these travels. From the unknowns that came up, form the things that shattered their versions of what they thought was the previous perfect ship. Best structural design, best short range weapon, best training method

If it were not for those that were willing to go out and fail then there would have been no future advancements

The ship would stay in the bottle; the Ferrari [technologically advanced version] would stay in the glass box

Never to be taking for its test drive never to be pushed to it’s limits never to be broken down to see if more refinement was needed

Just stagnant ship builders, Ferrari designers, sifu’s, masters and grand masters

What is really disappointing?
Is the lack of creative fire for progressive development, the fact that we even argue on the nesesicity of experimenting with different training methods, instead of sharing our results and progress and failure?

The fact that we cannot even decide on what a fight is, that we are so full of predetermined brain washed statements that we can not formulate our own honest individual thoughts, for fear of looking bad to our sifu or lineage or students.

The fact that people who in there heart know they will never test or push there skills will argue tooth and nail about results they have never experienced.

The fact that people who do test think that there version of testing is the only way to get results so they block out other’s ideas or observations

They fact that I’m spending time typing this instead of discussing training methods or results with all of you is dissapointing indeed

No one here is a professional fighter
Very few will ever fight
Even less will be attacked
All we can do is enjoy the training process, based on our own reality, the circle of life we walk in, this will guide out desired results for training

I would much rather learn from 1000 minds that are living 1000 different lives and learn what they discover from training and living

Then just repeat what I have been told like a mindless parrot or news reporter reading of a teleprompter

Everybody has a story to tell, just have to be honest enough to tell it and humble enough to listen

So tell me what was the latest gem you discovered in your training

[reneritchie]

I don't care how anyone trains or whether they believe their oral tradition or whatever, my concern is about the nature of the *claims* they make: is there support, evidence, proof (results) rather than conjecture, hearsay, belief (theory)?

No. Of course not. No double blind studies. No separating two twins at birth, raising one on a steady diet of slow forms, endless chi sao, and lots of Hei talk, and the other on nothing but progressive resistance.

People just talk. They do it all the time. They know the *greatest* rib joint in the US. They have the *best* movie or book ever made. Blustering is as old as, well, Adam's pick up lines to Eve...

Many people are not in MA for anything resembling reality. They get enough of that at work and at CNN. They want escapism, and MA, for a variety of reasons, is their escapism of choice.

--

BTW - My current preferred method of improvement in freestyle under resistance while being watched by an expert who then gives me specific solutions to problems and things I need to improve. I isolate one thing at a time and train until it is no longer a problem, or has been improved, then move on to the next thing.

It's the *best* way since all the *greatest* people do it that way, going back to the First Emperor...

[reneritchie]

Ernie makes the kind of sense that does.

[Hitman]

Please read my thread on the shalion kung fu forum - why not so many people can use their martial arts in a fight

Sifu Ross's thread on the kung fu forum - who is to blame

Whether wing chun is a great fighting art or not is totally depending on its practitioners. Sifu Duncan Leung said that he had to spend 5 -7 hours a day for four & a half years to learn the whole wing chun system. He also had to test out his wing chun on people. This caused his academic results to suffer.
How many wing chun practitioners are willing to spend that much time in order to learn wing chun? The answer is not many.
This may explain why so many wing chun practitioners' skills and understanding of wing chun are very limited.
I used to spend 2-2.5 hours a day training, 7 days a week for 2 years. I could not even apply a single wing chun technique against weak opponents during sparring matches. However, I could beat them up easily by forgetting about wing chun.
Is it mean wing chun is a rubbish fighting arts? No is the answer. This only means that I have not been taught properly and have not be shown how to apply wing chun in a fight. After spending a long time working out how to apply wing chun in a fight by trial and error - this means getting hit by my training partner. I could now apply some of my wing chun techniques in sparring matches.
If you want to make wing chun work, then you have to make a lot of sacrifices and testing it out. Otherwise, you will never know whether can you apply YOUR wing chun at the moment you need it most. By the time you got the answer it may be too late to do you any good. Any one can talk, but can you do it when facing a lunatic who wants to kill you. I know that I cannot do it, so I will run.



Hitman

[sihing]

Originally posted by Ernie
So tell me what was the latest gem you discovered in your training

That there is still more to discover and learn in my WC. Its really a never ending journey. Also that the Art works if you work the art and really understand it. Teaching does this for you, because when you do that you have to understand it and be able to not just perform it to a high quality personally but to be able to explain it to all types of people and have them understand it and be able to apply it, skillfully. Its not blind faith that I have in WC but a strong faith, with the realisization that anything can happen when it comes down to the crunch.

Good post by the way Ernie.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Hitman....That was a good post.

Wing Chun strategies and techniques have to constantly be tested - pretty much right from day one.

Spending "years" learning this and that (forms, chi sao, wooden dummy, etc.) - without simultaneously testing what you learn AS YOU GO ALONG - against resisting opponents -

is a waste of a lot of time, energy, and money.

[Knifefighter]

My disappointment is with all of the WC people who criticize others' fighting as "sloppy", "kickboxing", "no technique", and not quite up to par with how a real trained WC fighter will fight, but fail to provide any evidence at all of WC being used in this way.

My specific disappointment with you, James, is that you claim that WC is more effective than all other systems, yet you have never actually trained in another system nor really used your WC 100% against people from other systems.



Originally posted by sihing
Why is this so? Because lots on here think most WC practitioners are lazy? Lazy? No. Brainwashed? Yes.



Originally posted by sihing
Because Wing Chun lacks training or skills in certain ranges of combat, just like the one's the MMA want us to learn, but fail to see there limitations also?That's why most MMA fighters train in different systems... to address the individual weaknesses of each system.



Originally posted by sihing
How can anyone know exactly what thousands of other people are doing, especially when it comes to something as personal as one's choice of Martial Art?We can't. We can only go by the available evidence. Based on the evidence so far, there doesn't seem to be much effective WC being practiced out there. I'm sure there are probably some WC guys doing some effective stuff, but I'll bet the majority of the non-fighting theoreticians whould just say they were doing kickboxing or JKD rather than "real" WC.


Originally posted by sihing
which is probably why the May event was first conceived in the first place, but as expected a few on here have taken charge and re-directed the original path of the event (a get together for us to learn more and appreciate one another better) and made it into what they wanted, a sparring/fighting/ If I remember correctly, the May event was originally ALL about sparring. Then the theoreticians came in and started to water it down.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Person to person is the only way to really influence others to a great degree, which is probably why the May event was first conceived in the first place, but as expected a few on here have taken charge and re-directed the original path of the event (a get together for us to learn more and appreciate one another better) and made it into what they wanted, a sparring/fighting/lets find out who's who event with this rule and that, and we will only fight at the level you want to, whatever that means. What will that prove if the full intention on one's skills may never be allowed to be seen? And if the skills are let loose, then Ego's will be bruised for sure." (James)


My God...how pathetic.

I'm not going to Cleveland to do chi sao, James.

And neither am I going there to try and show people that I can beat them in sparring/fighting.

I'm going there to spar - that's for sure...

But I thought by now that I made it pretty clear that I'm bringing protective equipment...and am willing to go at any intensity people want to go at...30%....50%...80%....100%...

whatever they want - including frequent interruption of the sparring to talk about what just happened...go back and drill that scenario again - before resuming sparring...

very simple and non-confrontational.

No pressure.

And no ego.

What's your problem?

[kj]

Offering this on behalf of my many fellow forum members - both active and lurking - from a wide range of lineages, perspectives, and training styles, and with a diverse range of interests in Wing Chun and Wing Chun related discussion, and whom I greatly appreciate and respect.


Originally posted by t_niehoff
**It's not WCK -- the method -- that is in question, but the attitudes and the associated training methods prevalent in what I call "the culture of WCK" (or most TCMAs). That's two different things. And the "labels" of nonswimmer or theoretican/nonfihgter reflect those prevailing attitudes/approach towards training. I can't make anyone a nonswimmer; the *fact* they don't swim is what makes them a nonswimmer. Recognizing that fact isn't "labeling".

**Criticising these attitudes is not a criticism of WCK; nor does that criticism weaken WCK. A fighter only gets better by having their weaknesses (continually) pointed out to him. Those prevalent attitudes seriously limit one's potential for development, and only by recognizing them and changing can one make significant progress. Ignoring those weaknesses, putting our heads in the sand, [antagonistic and presumptuous]will have certain consequences.

<snip>

**As I said above, it's not WCK that is being criticized, but the attitude of some (most) of its "practitioners".

<snip>

**It depends on their goal. If their goal is to really learn and martial art and develop fighting skill (become good swimmers), the prevailing "culture of WCK" will actually prevent it. [see P.P.S. below]

<snip>

**I'm sure some of the theoreticans [name calling and negative baggage] are tired of the "tone", or more accurately, their attitude (the culture of WCK) being criticized and it being pointed out that there is no evidence to support their beliefs. Persons who fight, who actually *do* WCK, aren't going to be put off by a tone of "prove it" or "where is the evidence". The only persons put off by such a "tone" are those that don't do it, that can't do it, that have no evidence. [ad hominem, overgeneralized, presumptuous, and frankly just rude]

Despite trends over past months, I wasn’t aware that the charter of this forum was dedicated singly to the theme of your personal feelings, your values, or your attitudes. Or for that matter, even about your attitudes toward others' attitudes. It will be very unfortunately if the “climate” of the forum does indeed continue to follow your lead and degrade such that everyone is bent on pressing – or defending - their respective attitudes and values, rather than maintain focus on substantive Wing Chun related discussions. [Mea culpa]

Moreover, it will be a real shame if yet another internet forum with positive potential goes down the tubes on account of others modeling their behavior after yours in stirring up discord and feckless hostilities, whether overtly or in a more skillfully covert manner.

This should be a forum for discussing issues, not fundamentally about critiquing or insulting one another, making generalizations, insinuations, or putting each other “on notice” on the basis of differing attitudes, feelings, and values. There are already plenty of venues on the internet for that kind of nonsense.

On forums such as these, the important line in the sand has little to nothing to do with fighting or swimming, nor something in between or non-of-the-above. It is not some inane matter that everyone should be in agreement all or even some of the time, or holding hands and singing cum-ba-ya. It has everything to do with how we as mature and responsible adults behave toward one another. It takes so much time and effort to build a foundation sufficient to enable constructive communications, and it takes bloody little to destroy it. This reflects, my attitudes, my feelings, and my values which is, after all, what this forum is really about, LOL.

How about giving the forum a break, Terence? The problems on the forum aren’t all to your credit, but a fair share of it is.

Regards,
- kj

P.S. The swimmer analogy is a *metaphor* not a “fact”, and it *is* labeling.

P.P.S. If you want to be a good fighter or swimmer or parachutist or librarian or whatever, other people aren't your problem or a showstopper if you really want it and make it your priority to succeed. Blaming others for your lack of progress is simply whining; blaming others for your lack of opportunity is a plea to entitlement and failure of your own resourcefulness. IMNSHO. I don't really think we need to take the forum down the road of religion and politics, but I'm sure there are plenty besides myself willing to oblige if you insist.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Kathy Jo:

Since we're on the subject of attitudes...how come I never see you complain about the smug "Good Wing Chun doesn't need anything that I don't do" attitude that a bunch of the more conservative types around here display?

As if their undocumented and unseen Wing Chun expertise and knowledge is sitting on a mountain top?

That's a very condescending attitude also...isn't it?

[kj]

Originally posted by Ernie
They fact that I’m spending time typing this instead of discussing training methods or results with all of you is dissapointing indeed

I couldn't agree more. Then why do we?



No one here is a professional fighter
Very few will ever fight
Even less will be attacked
All we can do is enjoy the training process, based on our own reality, the circle of life we walk in, this will guide out desired results for training

Touche. Of course this begs the question of what all the constant fuss and needling is about.


I would much rather learn from 1000 minds that are living 1000 different lives and learn what they discover from training and living

I agree here too. How about we put our focus there, and "just do it" then?


So tell me what was the latest gem you discovered in your training

No miracles there. I'm acutely aware I'm the turtle surrounded by hares. For me the only real miracle lies is persistence, patience, and constantly looking for my own edges, and challenging my limits as feasibly as I can, day by day. That, and making a point to continue enjoying the process of training every day, and for the long haul.

Oh, and I really like the increasing impact I'm experiencing of applying the "cam" motion using my ulna and radius to upset my partner or momentarily change forces to gain time or advantage; at least when I can get the feel and timing right, LOL. I've also learned that Synvisc and physical therapy are terrific training aids - everyone's personal "gems" will vary, LOL.

Regards,
- kj

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Hitman
Sifu Duncan Leung said that he had to spend 5 -7 hours a day for four & a half years to learn the whole wing chun system. Train in effficient and effective fighting systems and you won't have spend 5-7 hours a day and sacrifice the other parts of your life to become good.

[Ernie]

KJ,
i think in good spirit [ originally ]
many shared there growth and wake up calls by way of pressure training ,
this is a fact and this path will always work

so those doing it are passionate since they have the truth on there side !

but not every one can or is willing to subject there body and mind to that type of brutal honesty

so we must be honest in our expectations and in our results

problem is when people are not being honest with themselves
about
1 not everyone can walk this walk so understand they can't relate to what your talking about , or they have been told it's not important by some one they look up to so they refuse to hear you , this messes with there faith and foundation

2 your truth is no one elses all you can do is say , hey this is what worked for me and those around me this is what we discovered

now it has become shut up you suck

but the funny thing is none of you are my enemies and i'm not out to get you so who cares who has the biggest balls !

so what might have started out as a good hearted expression of personal methods to grow has become twisted

the process of adding pressure to make coal into a diamond
has become if you don't do it this way or that way you suck

pressure can be added in steps , those steps can lead us to each other
by way of understanding and being honest with our level and how much we are willing to put in

i should be able to equally discuss with you the intent of the elbow in chi sau

and equally discuss the angle of cutting in on a full power thai kick with victor

different levels of pressure

same level of respect

you would not contact me for my knowledge of wing chun history
i have a very low level of skill there


as for gems

well like you since i have been exposed to kryptonite and my super human speed and power are reduced to slow painful motions

position and structure have been my saving grace

moving at half speed eating my way in slowly , pivoting on the point of contact , loading and becoming empty , using the negitive side of the the triangle [ free o pressure side ] instead of cutting angles

fun stuff

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Train in effficient and effective fighting systems and you won't have to spend 5-7 hours a day and sacrifice the other parts of your life to become good." (KF)


Barking up the wrong tree..many people here in NYC...including some tough karate fighters - as well as our very own Phil Redmond - can tell you from first-hand eye-witness knowledge that Duncan Leung - as a streetfighter - was one very tough hombre back in the 70's.

Very efficient and Very effective Wing Chun fighter.

[Ali Hamad Rahim]

Sometimes it’s hard to take, when all those years wasted on the quick fix and the illusion of superiority, only to find that its not so, learning the wing chun system in record time and proud of it, so much missed and so much is lost, to the point that we must put self in the way. Good wing chun is nothing more than the understanding of principles and concepts explained in detail from the fundamentals of SLT. But if you are in a hurry, you will never see it.

Ali Hamad Rahim.

detroitwingchun.com (http://detroitwingchun.com)

[Ultimatewingchun]

"learning the wing chun system in record time and proud of it..."

WHO might that be?

[kj]

Hi Victor,


Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Kathy Jo:

Since we're on the subject of attitudes...how come I never see you complain about the smug "Good Wing Chun doesn't need anything that I don't do" attitude that a bunch of the more conservative types around here display?

As if their undocumented and unseen Wing Chun expertise and knowledge is sitting on a mountain top?

That's a very condescending attitude also...isn't it?

Good question. The answer is pretty complex. In part it's ...

a) Because I don't see most of those people you refer to "pressing" their "attitude" on others as much as defending the right to have a perspective and exchange ideas in a civil and decent way on this forum. Furthermore, in many cases they post as they do in an effort to bring at least some balance to the forum discussions. Much of their "complaining" is at essence more about general tone and and how people on the forum treat each other, as it is about defense of a position on a given subject. And in that much I heartily agree with them; there's definitely something amiss of late. I am less concerned about extremes of position, than in how people use those extremes like weapons against one another generally or individually.

b) You may have noticed I didn't come out defending the "all you need is in Wing chun" either. I really didn't comment on it of late at all, one way or the other.

c) There is a loud enough communal "voice" on the incompleteness and uselessness of Wing Chun to balance out any perceived extremes in the perception about Wing Chun's completeness. So it didn't look like you guys were in dire need of my help to balance that one out.

d) Some of what we see people arguing (from both extremes) is more a function of limitations or styles of communication, rather than a full representation of what they may actually believe or are trying to say. What we see on the page may be even ****her [further ... darn filter] from what they really "do." I tend to look for substance and meaning more than the literal words on a page. I try to ask myself "What is this person really trying to say?" I'm not always successful, but I try.

If I were to make a general suggestion, we'd all do better if more people tried asking themselves the same question. And kudos to those who do and have made great efforts to "listen" and "understand" more ... there have been a few of you, and it hasn't all gone unnoticed.

e) Time is also a driving factor in picking my battles and contributions, as it should be for others. Tilting at windmills, pressing my perspective, or insisting to be considered as “right” is not generally a good use of my time, at least when I am able to recognize it as such.

f) I don't think poor behavior on anyone's part is appropriate, though being human, we're all guilty of it at times. I don't presume to be some perfect and unbiased arbiter either (besides on this forum that's Sandman's job, LOL), nor will I perceive everything that others do (though I do catch quite a lot). I confess leanings toward underdogs in discussion (call it a lifelong passion, LOL, and not limited to Wing Chun), and regardless of "position" argued; based on the sheer volume and energy of your postings alone, I would hardly consider some of you fellows as underdogs. Still, two wrongs don't make a right (I'm talking behavior, not position argued). Neither does one unchallenged or lopsided wrong make a right; so there's a bit of a catch-22, and pick-your-poison of late. An alternative is just to give up, and abandon the the forum as lost. Sometimes the right solution to a problem isn't so clear. <sigh>

FWIW, I do in fact believe what we are observing of late is not truly so much an argument over positions or beliefs, but rather a combination of frustrations and hopes for bringing sanity back to the forum. I believe it is also a grassroots refutation of the notion that most of us should just shut up and go away, as has been stated several times in so many words.

g) If you're actually asking what I think of the complete or incomplete Wing Chun idea, crosstraining, etc, that's an entirely different suite of matters than the issue of forum behaviors. You may notice, I rarely "push" my ideas on others, though on days where there is a more civil or welcoming tone on the forum, I may offer some of my thoughts, observations, or experiences in good faith, and to be taken or left FWLIW and as seen fit by my fellow readers.

h) Regarding my own thinking about Wing Chun being complete or incomplete, it really doesn't matter. As Ernie and others have said so many times, the only thing that really counts is what we do, and what we can do. Without greater context of both meaning and application it's mainly a semantics game. Mostly I've left that topic to the "experts" for debate, LOL. Since you asked though, and FWLIW, I'll take your question in good faith and try over the next few days to offer up a few of my own and varied thoughts on the subject.

i) Because the issue of Wing Chun's completeness is far from the only one being debated or being lumped together across the "lines in the sand." We've got the completeness vs. incompleteness issue, the what to do about it or do nothing issue, MMA vs. Wing Chun issue, Wing Chun vs. BJJ vs. every other method of groundfighting issue, the fighter vs. non-fighter issue, the sports fighter vs. personal defense vs. do it for fun issue, the you've got no right to speak issue, the let's see your video so we can pick apart your training, your skill, your lineage, and your credibility issue, etc. ad nauseum. So much to choose from, yet so little that actually interests me. Well, other than in seeing what makes other people tick, LOL.

j) I didn't presume it mattered much to anyone what I might think on the subject. Especially in light of the proliferation of posts already on the topic.

My larger concern on the forum is really not what people believe, how they train, what their capabilities are, their preferences in Wing Chun, interest in other martial arts, who can beat up who, etc. My main concern continues to be how forum members treat each other. It may not be easy, but with some effort it is possible to treat each other with a modicum of decency and human respect even when disagreeing with one another. Building poor relations builds a poor environment for interaction, making positive and constructive interchange increasingly unlikely. Worse, and unfortunately, forum behaviors sometimes lead to real, if really stupid, problems between people in "real" life too.

It boils down to this: If people value forums like this one as a potential means of fruitful exchange (on line) or connection with others (on and off line), then the forum itself and its membership must be treated and maintained with some degree of mutual care and respect. This is "my house" too, and when I see people carelessly or persistently trying to make a mess of it, that tends to get my attention. We can debate how much I know or don't know about Wing Chun, but I do know a little something about human nature and interactive group cultures.

So that's in part why I didn't complain directly to the "smug conservatives." I could go on, but it would likely max out KFO's present capacity. :p

I'll get back to you with some of my thoughts on the wholesomeness of Wing Chun thing as time allows.

Regards,
- kj

[old jong]

Good post Kathy Jo!

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Because I don't see most of those people you refer to "pressing" their "attitude" on others as much as defending the right to have a perspective and exchange ideas in a civil and decent way on this forum..." (KJ)


WELL I see that attitude as the height of hypocrisy and false pride - as it is usually these same people who can demonstrate nothing and explain nothing...

when the rubber really hits the road.

AND THEY DO "press their attitude" on others - and do it very often.

[old jong]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"Because I don't see most of those people you refer to "pressing" their "attitude" on others as much as defending the right to have a perspective and exchange ideas in a civil and decent way on this forum..." (KJ)


WELL I see that attitude as the height of hypocrisy and false pride - as it is usually these same people who can demonstrate nothing and explain nothing...

when the rubber really hits the road.

AND THEY DO "press their attitude" on others - and do it very often.

Are you feeling persecuted in any ways?...Why do you care so much about "these same people" :rolleyes: and about what they care or not to "demonstrate"?...Why do you care about us,"hypocrits" anyway?...:confused:

[Ultimatewingchun]

Michel:

Don't feel persecuted in the least...

Do feel as though I have an obligation to speak up...and speak up forcefully...

when I hear so much nonsense.

Doing Wing Chun 30 years...

started wrestling 12 years before that...

been in streetfights (from time-to-time) for the last 48 years...

Can't stand still and listen to some of this garbage - when I know it's garbage.

Vacillate between being tired of all this crap (and start to ignore it) - and being p***ed off to the point of having to say something.

C'est la vie.

[PaulH]

C'est la smile! =)
______________________

Smile, though your heart is aching
Smile, even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky
You'll get by...
If you smile
With your fear and sorrow
Smile and maybe tomorrow
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just...
Light up your face with gladness
Hide every trace of sadness
Although a tear may be ever so near
That's the time you must keep on trying
Smile, what's the use of crying
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just...
Smile, though your heart is aching
Smile, even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky
You'll get by...
If you smile
Through your fear and sorrow
Smile and maybe tomorrow
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just smile...
That's the time you must keep on trying
Smile, what's the use of crying
You'll find that life is still worthwhile
If you just smile

[SAAMAG]

Smiling gives you wrinkles.

[PaulH]

Perhaps that's why people who have 1 eyelid smile so much! =)

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Ernie
The most disappointing thing for of late [in response to James]
Is the fact that we are so polarized as a group in general?
The fact that we all agree that the wing Chun system in theory and on paper is a truly wonderful and thought provoking view of what combat could be.
Yet when it comes to application and training methods people scurry in all directions. Ernie,
You are right, this is THE big disappointment. We seem to have lost sight of the goal and become enamoured with "being right" in our position, rather than trying to find "the truth". I don't like it.

Quite frankly I think we aren't even really trying to understand each other's position, but rather immediately attack a person based on which "camp" we believe they fall into. I'm guilty of that as well. :o I might add.......So I'm not trying to point fingers here.

So, having said that, I am going to make an effort to be more open minded, less confrontational. Maybe a nice Cuba Libre would do the trick. ;)

Cheers,

[Ernie]

Originally posted by Matrix
Ernie,
You are right, this is THE big disappointment. We seem to have lost sight of the goal and become enamoured with "being right" in our position, rather than trying to find "the truth". I don't like it.

Quite frankly I think we aren't even really trying to understand each other's position, but rather immediately attack a person based on which "camp" we believe they fall into. I'm guilty of that as well. :o I might add.......So I'm not trying to point fingers here.

So, having said that, I am going to make an effort to be more open minded, less confrontational. Maybe a nice Cuba Libre would do the trick. ;)

Cheers,

ah refreshing !
bill i sent you an email ;)

[Edmund]

Originally posted by kj

It boils down to this: If people value forums like this one as a potential means of fruitful exchange (on line) or connection with others (on and off line), then the forum itself and its membership must be treated and maintained with some degree of mutual care and respect. This is "my house" too, and when I see people carelessly or persistently trying to make a mess of it, that tends to get my attention. We can debate how much I know or don't know about Wing Chun, but I do know a little something about human nature and interactive group cultures.


Hasn't EVERYONE read "Lord of the Flies"?

When everyone is free to express themselves however they feel it's not that difficult to fall into anarchy and then the fat kid gets his head cracked open.

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Edmund
Hasn't EVERYONE read "Lord of the Flies"?
I love that book. :cool:

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Everybody has a story to tell, just have to be honest enough to tell it and humble enough to listen." (Ernie)


Oh Ernie, you ol' Libra peace-maker...you.

Stop being so nice!

I'm gonna go ask a priest to hear my confession if you don't stop this!

Geez...

[kj]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"Because I don't see most of those people you refer to "pressing" their "attitude" on others as much as defending the right to have a perspective and exchange ideas in a civil and decent way on this forum..." (KJ)


WELL I see that attitude as the height of hypocrisy and false pride - as it is usually these same people who can demonstrate nothing and explain nothing...

when the rubber really hits the road.

AND THEY DO "press their attitude" on others - and do it very often.

That hasn't been as obvious to me as it apparently is to you, but it could be valid and I respect that as your observation and perception.

I personally don't presume to know anyone's soul or meaning here well enough to make the judgement call on hypocrisy, and I try to use care in judging present company on the basis of people and experiences past, or confusing them in my own mind as one and the same. More over, in the scheme of all my life's priorities, this stuff simply ranks really low on the list. So I won't be going there.

My bottom line is that *everyone's* behavior contributes to the success or failure of this forum as an overall constructive venue of discussion. It's not a matter of position, experience, or philosophy. Nor is it a matter of which issues ring with us respectively, or which battles we pick and choose. Success is, however, contingent on our behavior toward one another.

I highly recommend we all (you, me and everyone) see what we can do to lighten the atmosphere around here, and delve into things more productive. Cutting each other a little slack isn't altogether a bad thing. Paul, bless his heart, has already got a major head start on us in leading by example.

There's a lot to think about. Here's to good will exchanges and brighter days ahead for all present and future forum members.

Regards,
- kj

[Ernie]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
"Everybody has a story to tell, just have to be honest enough to tell it and humble enough to listen." (Ernie)


Oh Ernie, you ol' Libra peace-maker...you.

Stop being so nice!

I'm gonna go ask a priest to hear my confession if you don't stop this!

Geez...
Ha HA
man i'm just tired of all the silly $hit bother

miss the days when we broke things down and shared , we have such a kick a$$ chance to spread info with the internet

video clips and what not but people are head cases

i'm going to do my part behind the scenes with the more level headed cats

got tons of video and much more to film when i heal up

keep you in the loop player ;)

[dej2]

“It is not the failure of others to appreciate your abilities that should trouble you, but rather your failure to appreciate theirs.”

Confucius

Why are there so many differences from one Wing Chun Kung Fu family to the next? Because Wing Chun is based on principles and how they're interpreted. Unlike techniques, which can be learned through repetition, a principle must be understood. While there are many ways to demonstrate principles, how they are interpreted may not always be the same. This is where the differences can be found. A slightly different interpretation of the principle can change greatly the way it is translated. Wing Chun is a thinking persons form of martial arts, even after you’ve learned the complete system, don’t be afriad to discovering your own interpretations.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Maybe I'll just take a break from all of this for awhile...

will come back on in a few weeks when I'm ready to ask Phil to post the next set of clips on the VIDEO FOOTAGE thread.

I'll be fighting Hulk Hogan on the first clip...

(Oops...Sorry...wasn't supposed to devulge that information just yet).

[kj]

Originally posted by Ernie
as for gems

well like you since i have been exposed to kryptonite and my super human speed and power are reduced to slow painful motions

position and structure have been my saving grace

moving at half speed eating my way in slowly , pivoting on the point of contact , loading and becoming empty , using the negitive side of the the triangle [ free o pressure side ] instead of cutting angles

fun stuff

Good stuff Ernie. Even in something so seemingly small as this, you offer great food for thought and fodder for experimentation. That's the sort of stuff I have to focus on of necessity, so can appreciate the kind of things you're playing with. I'm confident that I'm a slower and more obtuse learner, though. ;)

Another problem I recognize in myself is that I still "try too hard," especially under pressure. I turn too much, enter too deep, give too much of my elbow away and expose it too much, etc. It all boils down to "greediness" or conversely some form of fear. It's an endless road of working on it day by day; there is no perfection, just working endlessly to get better and better at the things within my grasp and a tad closer to those just beyond it. One of the things I've grown to enjoy and benefit from the most is learning by "losing" and exposing my own shortcomings, if that makes any sense.

Still have a looooonnnggg way and lots of "aha" moments to go. Fortunately I love the journey, despite the pains and frustrations along the way.

As for the kryptonite, boy can I relate to that. Hope you're finding some improvement in that arm and shoulder. A slow go is better than no go.

Regards,
- kj

[anerlich]

I like Wing Chun a great deal. It is an elegant, efficient and sophisticated system.

I came to it via a number of other styles. My first instructor, David Crook, practised an ecletic style of Kung-fu, influenced by a number of instructors, including William Cheung. David taught, and showed by example, that many styles can be effective and have a lot to offer. David went out of his way to build bridges with MAists of all backgrounds, and hosted regular training camps to allow stylistic sharing and mutual respect.

Even after 15 years in Wing Chun, I still see it as one branch of a vast tree. I just walked in off the street into this school, thought the instructor was good, and signed up. I didn't make an oath at the crossroads at midnight that I would follow this path exclusively and defend somebody else's ideas till I was blue on the face on internet forums to people I've never met.

I found another couple of styles I thought were so cool I had to do them. And I did.

As for a conspiracy to bash Wing Chun, life's too short. I only talk about other styles and grappling on threads because people keep raising the subject and I have some knowledge and experience, plus I like it.

IMO too many put other styles like boxing and BJJ down to raise the profile of their own, which I think is intellectually dishonest and I argue against.

Some post obvious ignorance and rubbish about subjects in which I have some actual knowledge and experience, and I tell them they're wrong.

If you want a support group or mutual admiration society to reinforce your beliefs, go join the Moonies.

This is an internet forum, what do you expect? You want to see how bad it *could* be, go to the VTAA forum.

[Hitman]

Learning wing chun is easy. You can learn the whole system from different books and video tapes in about 3-6 months. Your problem is can you apply it against a resisting opponent.
The late Bruce Lee wanted to be the best fighter in the World. There was no secret that he wanted to be better than the late Wong Sheun Leung. He know more martial art systems than Wong Sheun Leung, but could he beat Wong Sheun Leung in a fight. The answer was no.
Mastering one system very well is much better than a person who know every martial arts in the world, but could not apply them - Jack of all trades and master of none.
To master and understand several different martial arts requires you to spend a much longer time testing and learn them. I would rather master one martial arts first before doing another one.

Hitman

[t_niehoff]

Hitman,

Except for the speculation about Bruce and Wong, I agree with you. IME WCK is a very simple fighting method. By "simple", I mean it has relatively few strategic and technical aspects, and can, as you indicated, be learned in a fairly short period of time. But I also have found that WSL was correct when he said "WCK is a great horse but few can ride her." (The evidence overwhelmingly supports that!). What my experience has shown me is that unlike many other arts where one can have moderate skill levels and still use it effectively (like boxing or BJJ), with WCK one *needs* a very high level of development/skill to make it truly work (in a fighting situation, particularly against someone with better attributes). In other words, there is a high threshold level that one must meet in their personal skill level (or in relative skill level) before WCK will be effective. Sort of like catching a bullet with your teeth -- if you can do it (which is extremely difficult), it's amazing to behold. But, if you don't have that high level of skill, you will fail miserably. This is why, for example, WCK typically has a poor showing when meeting other fighters, even those with much less training time. Put a moderately skilled boxer in with a moderately skilled WCK practitioner and the boxer will win easily. (One reason I don't think WCK is a good choice for someone interested in self-defense).

[Ernie]

T-Except for the speculation about Bruce and Wong

i heard that they had a race around the world

bruce could fly
and Wong could run very fast

Oh wait that was some other imaginary event the flash and super man;)


T-One reason I don't think WCK is a good choice for someone interested in self-defense).


i can just see the WC marketing guru's cringe , as all of a sudden the chi sau circles stop all at the same time around the world , they all look like they just woke up and walk out of the schools and in uniform lines of 2 like noah's ark fill the local boxing gyms !!

brutal man :D funny but brutal :D


KJ
it really comes down to realestate position before power , often when we meet a reference point we can just use a very small shift in angle to cut or glide towards the goal

but when our bodies are hurt or much weaker we can not support the contact point so we must use footwork or the ability to bring the empty side in as a attack side

hit by email there are some cool BJD footwork idea's that cut space and give you better lines when you can not support or get stuck [being greedy ]

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by Hitman
Learning wing chun is easy. You can learn the whole system from different books and video tapes in about 3-6 months. Your problem is can you apply it against a resisting opponent.
The late Bruce Lee wanted to be the best fighter in the World. There was no secret that he wanted to be better than the late Wong Sheun Leung. He know more martial art systems than Wong Sheun Leung, but could he beat Wong Sheun Leung in a fight. The answer was no.
Mastering one system very well is much better than a person who know every martial arts in the world, but could not apply them - Jack of all trades and master of none.
To master and understand several different martial arts requires you to spend a much longer time testing and learn them. I would rather master one martial arts first before doing another one.

Hitman
Hitman, this may be of interest to you:
http://www.free-element.com/wingchun/WSL_BL.pdf
PR

[dej2]

Mr. Redmond, that is an excellent article, thank you for the post.
__________
Darren Jew

[KPM]

Originally posted by anerlich
This is an internet forum, what do you expect? You want to see how bad it *could* be, go to the VTAA forum.

---Sure seems like we're headed that way! Is that what we want? To see this forum become another VTAA forum? What do I expect? I expect to be treated civilly, not to be "labeled" and categorized unnecessarily, not to have my viewpoints belittled, and not to have someone laugh at me for expressing my very valid concerns about how things are often expressed here. I don't think that is too much to ask for in polite conversation. And after all, that should be why we are all here...to engage in polite conversation....not to launch a crusade against everyone that doesn't think exactly like we do. If this is to become like another VTAA forum, then you can count me out.

Keith

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by KPM
---Sure seems like we're headed that way! Is that what we want? To see this forum become another VTAA forum? What do I expect? I expect to be treated civilly, not to be "labeled" and categorized unnecessarily, not to have my viewpoints belittled, and not to have someone laugh at me for expressing my very valid concerns about how things are often expressed here. I don't think that is too much to ask for in polite conversation. And after all, that should be why we are all here...to engage in polite conversation....not to launch a crusade against everyone that doesn't think exactly like we do. If this is to become like another VTAA forum, then you can count me out.

Keith
I have to agree with you Doc. That VTAA forum is for losers. I don't think this forum will ever get that bad.:)
PHIL

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by dej2
Mr. Redmond, that is an excellent article, thank you for the post.
__________
Darren Jew
You're very welcome. Also note that when Bruce Lee asks WSL if he'll ever be able to beat "Chang" he's talking about Cheung Cheuk Hing (William Cheung). Chang is Mandarin for Cheung.
PR

[SAAMAG]

There's one line in there that stood out to me...

"It taught him that one cannot naturally become a successful man, one had to fight"

Basically saying that to acquire skill in fighting...one has to fight.

Simply put, from someone who everyone in the wing chun lineages knows was a fighter.

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by Vankuen
There's one line in there that stood out to me...

"It taught him that one cannot naturally become a successful man, one had to fight"

Basically saying that to acquire skill in fighting...one has to fight.

Simply put, from someone who everyone in the wing chun lineages knows was a fighter.
Good observation. The article also quotes WSL as saying,
"My opinion was to get combat experience was more important than any other thing". But that's because his goal was to fight. I understand that people do WC for various other reasons which are just as valid.
PR

[sihing]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
Good observation. The article also quotes WSL as saying,
"My opinion was to get combat experience was more important than any other thing". But that's because his goal was to fight. I understand that people do WC for various other reasons which are just as valid.
PR

Then another question that comes from your post is, even though people join and practice the WC they do for various reasons, is it true or false to say that if you have high quality skills in whatever WC you practice, are you an effective fighter or person with effective self defense abilities?

James

[t_niehoff]

sihing wrote:

Then another question that comes from your post is, even though people join and practice the WC they do for various reasons, is it true or false to say that if you have high quality skills in whatever WC you practice, are you an effective fighter or person with effective self defense abilities?

**Your reasoning is circular. How does one know if they have "high quality skills" other than by fighting? You see this is the problem -- folks see some ability they or their sifu has outside of fighting, let's say in chi sao or whatever, and conclude (assume) that those abilities will successfully transfer to fighting (and without any significant adjustment in how they are performed) and/or that that ability is all they will need to fight successfully (at a good level). So they beleive they have "good WCK skills" and that they will be able to fight well with them. Those assumptions are false. And genuine experience (fighting good people) will prove that to you. Good WCK skills are not some separate entity from good fighting skills -- good WCK skills means good fighting skills using WCK's tools and method. You can't have good WCK without being a good fighter. And there is no way to know if one has good fighting skills (or to develop them) without fighitng.

**Also, self-defense abilities don't rest significantly on WCK (or fighting) skills but are something else entirely and go well-beyond WCK. Moreoever, to develop skill in WCK is difficult and that investment isn't necessary to simply learn to "defend oneself." If someone wants to learn to "defend themselves" they would do much better than spend the time necessary to develop higher level empty-hand fighting skills -- they should take an excellent self-defense course which will focus on the main aspects of self defense: situational awareness and response (what to do when someone pulls a gun on you and orders you into their car, for example), improvised weaponry, using surprise to their advantage, escapes, gradually becoming acclimated to dealing with high levels of physical stress, etc.

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by sihing
Then another question that comes from your post is, even though people join and practice the WC they do for various reasons, is it true or false to say that if you have high quality skills in whatever WC you practice, are you an effective fighter or person with effective self defense abilities?

James
There are many X-factors in real combat/self defense but if the skills a person aquired in WC were geared towards actual combat then my answer would be yes. I don't want people to think that I don't like WC or that it isn't effective. I do advocate hard and realistic training though.
PR

[sihing]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
sihing wrote:

Then another question that comes from your post is, even though people join and practice the WC they do for various reasons, is it true or false to say that if you have high quality skills in whatever WC you practice, are you an effective fighter or person with effective self defense abilities?

**Your reasoning is circular. How does one know if they have "high quality skills" other than by fighting? You see this is the problem -- folks see some ability they or their sifu has outside of fighting, let's say in chi sao or whatever, and conclude (assume) that those abilities will successfully transfer to fighting (and without any significant adjustment in how they are performed) and/or that that ability is all they will need to fight successfully (at a good level). So they beleive they have "good WCK skills" and that they will be able to fight well with them. Those assumptions are false. And genuine experience (fighting good people) will prove that to you. Good WCK skills are not some separate entity from good fighting skills -- good WCK skills means good fighting skills using WCK's tools and method. You can't have good WCK without being a good fighter. And there is no way to know if one has good fighting skills (or to develop them) without fighitng.

**Also, self-defense abilities don't rest significantly on WCK (or fighting) skills but are something else entirely and go well-beyond WCK. Moreoever, to develop skill in WCK is difficult and that investment isn't necessary to simply learn to "defend oneself." If someone wants to learn to "defend themselves" they would do much better than spend the time necessary to develop higher level empty-hand fighting skills -- they should take an excellent self-defense course which will focus on the main aspects of self defense: situational awareness and response (what to do when someone pulls a gun on you and orders you into their car, for example), improvised weaponry, using surprise to their advantage, escapes, gradually becoming acclimated to dealing with high levels of physical stress, etc.

Like I've said before, sooner or later you have to test your skills in an environment that is as realistic as possible. That's why we have tests, to find out if the ability is there. Also this has to be tested by someone competent enough to be able to judge. Is it your opinion Terence that you are the only one qualified? I certainly hope not, for your sake. If your faith in your instructor/Sifu is low then move on to someone else, mine isn't as he has had plenty of fighting experience, so I trust his cirriculum as it was passed down to me and the way we passed it down to others junior to me. Again as per usual, your arguement is strickly your opinion.

And as for WC self defense skills and what it has to offer, WC is overkill if you ask me, and if this was the only thing I wanted out of it I could have stopped learning 13 yrs ago.

James

[sihing]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
There are many X-factors in real combat/self defense but if the skills a person aquired in WC were geared towards actual combat then my answer would be yes. I don't want people to think that I don't like WC or that it isn't effective. I do advocate hard and realistic training though.
PR

Wing Chun is all about combat, firstly, so of course someone is there to learn that aspect. Later on other things take on more concern, and the combat aspect may become a by product of the training.

James

[couch]

Originally posted by sihing
Wing Chun is all about combat, firstly, so of course someone is there to learn that aspect. Later on other things take on more concern, and the combat aspect may become a by product of the training.

James

I agree with you. Like you said on another post...WC is quite overkill in a sense. If Wing Chun is being taught properly, then the byproduct is self-defense knowledge. Over things can come from this, depending on the kwoon: cardio, sparring, fighting...

But I think that what you really need to use your Wing Chun is heart. You need to want to win...to pummel an opponent into the ground, etc. Although a person may learn self-defense, if they are not commited to the defense on the street, they could get seriously hurt. I think this thought may be scary to some. You're not lining up in a row and doing downward foot blocks in the air, or performing flying spinning back kicks. That stuff is fun and cool and all....Wing Chun is about fighting and fighting only.

Just some thoughts,
Kenton Sefcik

[anerlich]

"What do I expect? I expect to be treated civilly, not to be "labeled" and categorized unnecessarily, not to have my viewpoints belittled, and not to have someone laugh at me for expressing my very valid concerns about how things are often expressed here. I don't think that is too much to ask for in polite conversation."

I'd like that, but expecting or demanding it is probably unrealistic. I believe I'm on the receiving end at least as much as the giving, including from some who seem to complain the loudest about forum behaviour..

But getting called names doesn't bother me one bit.

" And after all, that should be why we are all here...to engage in polite conversation."

Funny, I usually start feeling more irreverent when someone tries to tell me how they think I "should" behave on this forum, let alone how I "should" talk about MA, or be told I'm disloyal or pathetic or a troll if I don't think WC or its practitioners are perfect.

[KPM]

Andrew wrote:
I'd like that, but expecting or demanding it is probably unrealistic.

---Maybe you need higher expectations. :-)

I believe I'm on the receiving end at least as much as the giving, including from some who seem to complain the loudest about forum behaviour..

---Not from me, if that is the implication. But I agree that you are often on the receiving end. But doing unto others just because they have done unto you isn't a very good philosophy to live by either.

Funny, I usually start feeling more irreverent when someone tries to tell me how they think I "should" behave on this forum, let alone how I "should" talk about MA,

---I was referring to what is generally recognized as acceptable behaviour in any given civil social circle. If forum members are not willing to abide by even basic guidelines as to how to act civilly in public then this forum will degenerate to something resembling the VTAA forum. I don't think its too much to ask people to treat each other politely and respectfully.....is it?

or be told I'm disloyal or pathetic or a troll if I don't think WC or its practitioners are perfect.

---True. And if those people were also abiding by the simple guideline of treating each other politely and respectfully that wouldn't happen.

Keith

[RedJunkRebel]

Who knows?

[Hitman]

Thank you Sifu Redmond for posting that thread for me.

I forgot to mention that if you want to test your wing chun skills you must prepared to get hurt. I got kick on my right ankle two years ago by a sweep kick and could not walk for 4 days!
Good quality martial artists are measured by whether they can apply what they have learned under pressure and not under tournament environment. I once sparred with a guy who did 7 years of karate, I think he had also attended some tournaments as well. He was much better than me. He was faster and stronger than me. He could kick me with easy and probably could defeat me easily in a tournament.
During the sparring match he blocked all my hand attacks, until I changed me style. I fought him like a mad man who wanted to beat the crap out of him. His defence disappeared within 2 seconds and he end up running away from me in order to escape my attacks.
The point I trying to make is unless you are mentally prepared for a fight, you can be beaten up by unskillful person.

Hitman

[Ultimatewingchun]

"During the sparring match he blocked all my hand attacks, until I changed me style. I fought him like a mad man who wanted to beat the crap out of him. His defence disappeared within 2 seconds and he end up running away from me in order to escape my attacks.
The point I'm trying to make is unless you are mentally prepared for a fight, you can be beaten up by unskillful person." (Hitman)


ALL THE MORE REASON why frequent hard contact sparring is a must - otherwise it all breaks down under the pressure of a real attack meant to hurt you.

The mental (psychological) aspects of martial art training is the single most important element in the whole process, imo - if your goal is to really learn how to defend yourself if need be in the real world.

[Hitman]

Hard contact sparring session is not practical as you will soon lose all your training partners. You may even have a problem finding people to train with you in the future. Also the training session may become a contest of survival that both of you are no longer care about how to apply your techniques. This does not benefit anyone.
Wearing protective clothing and gloves do not save you from getting hurt. It only make you over confidence and forget about your own safety. No one wants to get hurt in their sparring matches! This including me! You do not have to hit your training partner hard. You just have to install enough fear into your training partner's mind to make the training session realistic.
When I sparred with that karate guy, I did not even hit him once. I just created enough fear and installed the idea that he was going to get hurt if he continue to spar with me.

Hitman

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Wearing protective clothing and gloves do not save you from getting hurt. It only make you over confidence and forget about your own safety. No one wants to get hurt in their sparring matches! This including me! You do not have to hit your training partner hard. You just have to install enough fear into your training partner's mind to make the training session realistic.
When I sparred with that karate guy, I did not even hit him once." (Hitman)


I DON'T BUY ANY OF THIS.

[Hitman]

You use your facial expression and eyes to generate fear into your opponent. When I fight people for real, my eyes turned red in colour and my face have no expression. I also make a lot of noise like shouting.
Please watch Tyson's boxing matches in the late 80s and early 90s and you will find that most of his opponents lost the fights before they even stepped into the ring. He won the fight by creating fear into his opponents. He was also a very skillful boxer at that time.
Bruce Lee's second film "Chinese Connection or Fist of Fury" where he fought the Japanese karate guys. Please pay attention to the way he looked at his opponents.
Me and my training partners do strikes to the eyes, throat and groin at moderate speed in our training session. If we were to do hard sparring session, as you have suggested we will be death or disable a long time ago. We do not wear any protective clothing, except a pair of goggle to protect our eyes. We both got hit on the throats many times. We do not need to be hit hard to know that it hurt!
I once sparred wearing protective clothing and found bruises all over my chest, after the sparring session. I also got hit on my head and I was dazzle. I was relying on the protective clothing to protect me, instead of my skills!
I also sparred with a female kick boxer who was so used to wearing her protective clothing that it made her reckless. I was hitting the areas that was not protective by the protective clothing.
Many ancient Japanese's swordmen were wearing armours in battles and they were still killed in battles. How? Their opponents were attacking the areas that were not protective by the armours.
I agreed that you should wear protective clothing, but do not become so depending on it that you cannot fight without it.

Please remember that on the street you will not be wearing any protective clothing!

Your goals and my goals are different. Therefore, you do not have to agree with me at all. What works for me may not work for you.

Hitman

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Please remember that on the street you will not be wearing any protective clothing!

Your goals and my goals are different. Therefore, you do not have to agree with me at all. What works for me may not work for you." (Hitman)


MY MARTIAL ART goals have always been preparation for the street...everything else is secondary to me.

And fighting/sparring with hard contact (and therefore protective gear is necessary) is vitally important to preparation for reality fighting.

As far as eyes are concerned...I'm too busy watching my opponent's body (specifically his elbows, knees, and targets)...and my mind has been trained through concentration drills and meditation...NOT to pay any attention to ugly looks, extraneous body language, or loud scary noises when I fight.

So you're right - what works for me might not work for you.

[rogue]

Bruce Lee's second film "Chinese Connection or Fist of Fury" where he fought the Japanese karate guys. Please pay attention to the way he looked at his opponents. It was a movie.

[Hitman]

Rouge,
The point I am trying to make is INTIMIDATION. If you can frighten your opponent to give up before the start of the fight, then you do not have to fight very hard to win. If intimidation does not work, then you can either run or you can fight. The choice is your. Even if you won and successfully defended yourself against an assult on the street. You may end up as a loser in the court and pay million of dollars in damages to your attacker(s). I would rather run and live, instead of being end up as many "have a go dead hero".

Hitman

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Hitman,
From what I've seen, intimidation doesn't work on someone who's willing to fight. So IMO, it's wasted energy.
It usually doesn't start as a standoff anyways so unless you want to go around yelling at the sky all the time it may not work.
:)

J

[rogue]

If you're going to intimidate someone it had better be scarier then Phil Elmores Eyebrow (Patent Pending).


If you can frighten your opponent to give up before the start of the fight, then you do not have to fight very hard to win. If intimidation does not work, then you can either run or you can fight.
If you're going to try to intimidate someone you better not be thinking about running away. You've commited yourself to a bluff that you better be selling hard. And don't count on fright making someone easier to defeat, fear is a great motivator for some.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Hitman
When I fight people for real, my eyes turned red in colour and my face have no expression. I also make a lot of noise like shouting.

Bruce Lee's second film "Chinese Connection or Fist of Fury" where he fought the Japanese karate guys. Please pay attention to the way he looked at his opponents. I'm guessing you're... what... about 14 years old?

[Hitman]

Intimidation does work in real life and I have done it many time. If you just yelling at the sky all the time and do nothing else then it will definitely not work! Your oppoent will definitely beat you up. Whether it will work is totally depending on how you use it. Of couse you need some real fighting skills to back up your threat!

Of course nothing in life is certain, except death and tax.

Intimidation will fail you in many occasions. It is like you are carrying a loaded gun (intimidation) with you all the time and got beaten up by a determined unarmed attacker. Are you then telling me that a loaded gun (intimidation) is worthless and you will not carry it in the future! I hope that you are not suggesting to people that a loaded gun (intimidation) is worthless, just because you do not know how to use it yourself.


Hitman

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey again,
A loaded gun is useless if you're not going to use it.
That's why I don't carry guns and only carry around my 10 foot luk dim boom kwan :D
You don't need a loaded gun for intimidation, actually all you need is a toy replica for that but then deep inside you'll know that it's really a fake.

I still like the saying ' A show-er never stabs and a stab-er never shows'
If you don't want to fight someone just say, I don't wanna fight and walk away, if you can't walk away, well then.... whatever happens , happens

J

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Hitman
Of couse you need some real fighting skills to back up your threat! If you have "real fighting skills", why bother with the theatrics? Just do what needs to be done.

[Hitman]

If you have "real fighting skills", why bother with the theatrics? Just do what needs to be done.

Have you read my previous reply about that if you win a fight on the street, but you could become a loser in the court and pay out million of dollars to your attacker(s)?

If you are about to be attack by five people carrying baseball bats and you got a loaded gun. You prevented them from assulting you by pointing a gun at them. You told them to stay still while you call the police. If they decided to run and ignore your intimidation. Are you going to shoot them just because your theatrical threat do not work! No is the answer! Once you start shooting, you will probably have to KILL OR INJURE all five of them to prevent them from attacking you. They attacked you because they fear that you are going to kill them! You will also be charged with MURDERING OR WOUNDING five people who were no longer a threat to you - You will be going to jail for some time!
You need the theatrics threat to intimidate your attackers, so that you do not have to fight in the first place. Bullies use intimidation to frighten their viticims and they do not use it agaisnt some one who will fight them back.

For instance in a football match you do not like some of the rivial fans and one of them decided that he is going to beat you up. Are you going to start a fight with that person? No is the answer, because once you started fighting, the chances of the other people joining the fight is great. You could end up with over hundred people attacking you. Are you going to fight with over hundred people and get beating to death just because your ego told you to do so? The decision is all your.

Hitman

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I think it is important to point out that one should never make a threat or resort to "theatrics" if one does not have the will and intent to actually carry the act out. If you do not have the will to use a weapon then you are better off not pulling one. Many people are injured and or killed with their own weapons. This is a factor in why most police departments issue protective vests which are rated to protect against the same caliber they issue and carry.

One of the reasons for the "force continuim" is the proper escalation of force. A common rule of thumb is that you can always go up but it is very difficult to go down. In other words if you pull a gun as your first resort and it does not discourage the attacker then you have no choice but to shoot. If you point a gun at me and I know you are not justified in using it, and I chose to call your bluff then what do you do next? Of course if you are mentally ill and do not care and shoot me then whether you lose in court or not it probably won't matter to me. :o

As to the scenario given with multiple attackers armed with weapons, in this case baseball bats; in most cases you would be justified in pulling a weapon to defend yourself. If they still attempted to attack you, you would be justified, in most cases, with shooting the attacker(s). Of course this does not give one carte blanche to shoot everyone ;) Another important point is that you must stop once the threat of attack or real danger is no longer present.

I would caution anyone from relying on a gun for protection. In many cases it provides a false sense of security as most people would never expect to actually need to shoot someone. If you are not prepared to do the deed then don't make the threat. Also you could never admit to shooting to kill someone, the appropriate terminology would be that you shot "to stop the action". Plus you want to make it very clear that you feared for your life or that of your loved ones. Also keep in mind that in most states you have a "duty to retreat" provided you can do so with reasonable safety.

There are too many variables to give a blanket statement as to what one is allowed or not allowed to do. Bottom line, IMHO, if someone attacks you, you use the amount of force necessary to stop them from hurting you, if this means using deadly force then do so without hesitation. Worry about the courts later on.

Peace,

Dave

[Jeff Bussey]

This is what theatrics gets you:

http://ottawa.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=ot-dogattack20050126

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Hitman
Have you read my previous reply about that if you win a fight on the street, but you could become a loser in the court and pay out million of dollars to your attacker(s)? Not where I come from.


You need the theatrics threat to intimidate your attackers, so that you do not have to fight in the first place. Bullies use intimidation to frighten their viticims and they do not use it agaisnt some one who will fight them back. Theatrics do not necessarily intimidate, they can also inflame potential attackers. So do what you have to do if necessary. I think Dave makes the points well enough.

[anerlich]

Have you read my previous reply about that if you win a fight on the street, but you could become a loser in the court and pay out million of dollars to your attacker(s)?

Yeah, I did read it FWIW.

If you make threats and visibly try to intimidate the guy before the fight, it may look even worse for you in court. It will be hard to take the line "I was only trying to defend myself" if you were overheard threatening the guy with pain, injury or death just beforehand.

[Merryprankster]

If you make threats and visibly try to intimidate the guy before the fight, it may look even worse for you in court. It will be hard to take the line "I was only trying to defend myself" if you were overheard threatening the guy with pain, injury or death just beforehand.

Yup. The standard in most places is whether or not a reasonable person would consider themselves threatened. If so, they are legally able to respond with reasonable force UNTIL THE THREAT IS OVER. That is, if the person tries to leave, you can't chase them down. If they cover up and cower in the corner, you can't keep whacking them. If you knock them out, you need to stop.

If you make threatening statements to somebody BEFORE an altercation, it negates self-defense. It shows you didn't feel in danger, but might, in fact, have been on the offensive.

"Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six," types maybe haven't thought of the PENETRATING consequences of being in prison with a guy named Bubba who takes a shine to "yore purty mouth."

[old jong]

IMO,a armbar,a choke or some other type of submissive technique if done with real damage: (The guy is choked out or his arm is broken) can lead to court troubles more than punches.IMO,they ask for a lot more commitment and control to perform well.Try to tell a juge that you just tried to defend yourself when you had to assume a control position before securing a lock or choke;a technical move requiring intent and control and then applied enough force to inflict damage.Hard to believe it was all nervous reactions!...

[anerlich]

IMO,a armbar,a choke or some other type of submissive technique if done with real damage: (The guy is choked out or his arm is broken) can lead to court troubles more than punches.

IMO, there are no guarantees either way.

The ideal situation would be controlling the person without injuring them until the cops arrive, in which case learning ground control positions is a great way to go. How feasible that is in all given situations is another matter.

With chokes and armlocks, you *arguably* have a greater degree of control over the damage you do. A famous Australian cricketer dies not long ago after an altercation with a bouncer - the bouncer punched him, he fell down and hit his head on the pavement, dying in hospital not long thereafter. The bouncer by all accounts made a few other mistakes, like following him away from the venue, but in any case he punched the guy and is now up on manslaughter charges. The cricketer was no angel either, with a history of being belligerent when drunk, but that's no excuse.

This is not to say that you cannot try to choke out some guy with an unknown medical condition who lapses into a coma, or you accidentally permanently incapacitate someone with a heelhook who then sues you because he cannot work as a professional runner any more.

The upshot is there is no 100% "safe" way to subdue someone, nor any guarantee of success. So fights are best avoided if at all possible.

[old jong]

I agree with you anerlich.
The instant you start going after the guy,you are actively participating in a fight,not just defending yourself.Your bouncer example is true and we should always do what is necessary but never more.
The circumstances are always a big factor in the amount of force you can "legally" use.

[Sihing73]

Originally posted by old jong
IMO,a armbar,a choke or some other type of submissive technique if done with real damage: (The guy is choked out or his arm is broken) can lead to court troubles more than punches.IMO,they ask for a lot more commitment and control to perform well.Try to tell a juge that you just tried to defend yourself when you had to assume a control position before securing a lock or choke;a technical move requiring intent and control and then applied enough force to inflict damage.Hard to believe it was all nervous reactions!...

Hello,

I believe that Old Jong makes some good points. An old adage is that it takes far less skill to harm than to control. It takes less skill to strike someone than to apply a realisitic control in a fluid combat situation.

Having said that: it is also true that if you understand what you are doing you may find that the opportunity to apply a control or lock are more common than you think. Also, a properly applied lock can be applied very quickly in flow with the energy given so much so that it is over before you know it. In such a case the actual lock or throw or break may be even quicker than a strike.

IMHO, it is very worthwhile to learn how to apply locks and controls in real life situations. While it is true that you need a higher degree of skill to apply them; it is also true that you have a variable level of force you can apply. You can apply the lock with just enough force to control the opponent and be able to escalate or increase to a break if needed. One thing to keep in mind is that you must remain fluid. The human body is an amazing device and you may find that people adjust to the pain so that a lock which seemed effective may become less effective as time progresses and the body adjusts to the pain and position. Two things to keep in mind when applying a control; you must destroy the opponents balance. You can do this by taking them to the ground on lifting them up on their toes. Anything less will afford them the opportunity to fight back. Another thing is to always be flexible and fluid. Change is the name of the game, do not committ to one method or technique but be ready to chang eto something else or modify what you are doing as the need arises.

As to the situation in court; a lot will depend on your demeanor and how your present your case. If you can show that you were attempting to defend yourself and cause the least amount of injury to your opponent then you should be okay. While it is true that a joint lock or control technique requires more skill, this is also something the courts are likely to consider. Most juries will tend to side with someone who can show that striking an attacker is far easier to do and places the defender in a less dangerous position, ie less likely to be injured but opted to try to "restrain" the opponent without harming them any more than needed. Few people expect us to be Bruce Lee and able to defeat our attackers with ease. The fact that you opted for a more "humane" method of defense could work in your favour. Of course, this all depends on how well you can spin the tale. ;)

Bottom line is that you are, in most cases, permitted to use the amount of force needed to insure your safety. But, you also have a duty to retreat if you can do so in safety. Best bet is to not fight unless you are in serious danger, and then DESTROY the opponent as quickly and as efficiently as possible. Worry about court afterwards. When your life is in danger court should not even be a consideration!!

Peace,

Dave

[Hitman]

What I mean by intimidation is the ability to destroy your opponent's fighting spirit without the use for voilent or foul lanuagae. If you only thinking about using scary face, foul lanuage, shouting aloud or use weapon to back up your threat, then you definitely have not understand the truth meaning of intimidation and its effect.


Please read the The book of five rings, art of war by Sun Tzu and the Chinese classic "The three kingdom" - about one of the battles involving over 8000000 men. It described one of the generals who fought like a demon and his enemies were too frighten to fight him. Some of his enemies' generals who had fought him before to a stand still (ONE TO ONE), decided to run instead of facing him in the battle. Is this mean that the man had suddenly increased his fighting skills so much that he could beat all his enemies? In real life he could easily be killed by the combined effort of three of his enemies' generals. No is the answer, that general was able to tap into the human's hidden power - killer instinct? despertion and fighting spirit and use them to the maxmium. His desperation to escape the battle alive were greater than his opponets. He increased his own fighting sprit and killer instinct to such a point that it crushed his opponent's fighting spirits without fighting them. They no longer had the desired to fight him! They feared for their own lives!


Hitman

[Hitman]

The effects of intimidation cannot be described with words. To understand it you need to experince it yourself. Until you have experienced yourself, you do not have to believe me.
I once experienced the effect of self imposting fear in a sparring match. I could not move at all. My body was liked a ton of lead, I could not move or open my mouth. I was in a land of terror and felt helpless. I was behaving liked a human punching bag and could not do a thing to defence myself. It took me 4 weeks to overcome my fear.

One of the karate books I read, described Fred Wren?, a karate champion between 1960s -1970s, who was such a brilliant intimidator. He could cause some of his opponents to quit their matches, instead of fighting him. Those who had fought him described him as a monster from Steven King's horror book.

Hitman

[Sihing73]

Originally posted by Hitman
What I mean by intimidation is the ability to destroy your opponent's fighting spirit without the use for voilent or foul lanuagae. If you only thinking about using scary face, foul lanuage, shouting aloud or use weapon to back up your threat, then you definitely have not understand the truth meaning of intimidation and its effect.Please read the The book of five rings, art of war by Sun Tzu and the Chinese classic "The three kingdom" - Hitman

Hitman,

The state of ones mind is paramount to not only winning but to surviving a violent street encounter. Winning and surviving are not always the same thing. It is possible to win but to be so overcome by the stress and realization of things you had to do win that you fall apart afterwards. However, this is different than intimidation.

From Merriam Websters dictionary the definition of "intimidation" is;

"Main Entry: in·tim·i·date
Pronunciation: in-'ti-m&-"dAt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -dat·ed; -dat·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin intimidatus, past participle of intimidare, from Latin in- + timidus timid
: to make timid or fearful : FRIGHTEN; especially : to compel or deter by or as if by threats
- in·tim·i·dat·ing·ly /-"dA-ti[ng]-lE/ adverb
- in·tim·i·da·tion /-"ti-m&-'dA-sh&n/ noun
- in·tim·i·da·tor /-'ti-m&-"dA-t&r/ noun
synonyms INTIMIDATE, COW, BULLDOZE, BULLY, BROWBEAT mean to frighten into submission. INTIMIDATE implies inducing fear or a sense of inferiority into another <intimidated by so many other bright freshmen>. COW implies reduction to a state where the spirit is broken or all courage is lost <not at all cowed by the odds against making it in show business>. BULLDOZE implies an intimidating or an overcoming of resistance usually by urgings, demands, or threats <bulldozed the city council into approving the plan>. BULLY implies intimidation through threats, insults, or aggressive behavior <bullied into giving up their lunch money>. BROWBEAT implies a cowing through arrogant, scornful or contemptuous treatment <browbeat the witness into a contradiction>. "

As you can see the word intimidation has a negative connotation. In Wing Chun it is possible to trap the opponent mentally or his will and present an unbeatable front to them. This however is not intimidation. I believe that from my posts you can infer that I am all about the total destruction of my opponent in the most efficient and brutal manner possible, if and when it is warranted. Real life however shows that such an ultimate response is hardly ever warranted. I think that you may have read too many stories and may not fully understand their meaning. Sun Tzus' The Art of War refers to the greatest victory as one in which no combat takes place. The Book of Five Rings is a treatise on strategy using the elements as references. Both are excellent reading and one can gain important insights from them, however, everything must be taken in context and you need to look beyond the surface to garner the true deeper meanings.

I will share with you another story which is illustrative of the "unbeatable mindset";

In fuedal Japan there was a tea master who accidently offended a Samurai. The samurai was about to cut the tea master down even though the tea master had appoligized and assured him he meant no harm. The samurai decided to toy with the tea master and told him to meet him the next day at noon at which time they would fight, if he did not show up then he would be hunted down and killed like a dog. (This is a nice show of intimidation ;) ) The tea master did not know what to do and came up with the idea of hiring another samurai to protect him. The other samurai declined saying he did not hire out to commoners. The tea master then asked him to teach him how to fight with a sword. After considering the situation this samurai agreed to do so. Short story is that the tea master was inept and would never be a match with a sword. The samurai told him that he would die the next day. The tea master was very depressed upon hearing he would die. The samurai asked him to make some tea. The tea master went about the task of preparing the tea and an amazing transformation took place. He was no longer tired nor nervous. He was extremently calm and entirely focused on the task at hand. The samurai told him to stop what he was doing and asked him if he wanted to die with honour the tea master replied YES. The samurai then told him that when he saw his opponent coming to draw his sword and enter the mind of making tea. The tea master, also a master, understood. The next day the tea master went to meet his opponent. Upon seeing him approach the tea master drew his sword and held it over his head in the first position. He was totally focused and had accepted his fate. The other samurai at first laughed thinking at least the fool had decided to show up. However as he approached he examined the tea master and could find no *****, no break in his focus. The samurai accepted that he could not defeat him and he appoligized and wen on his way.

In the above story, which I paraphrase somewhat, which one used intimidation?

Peace,

Dave

[anerlich]

What I mean by intimidation is the ability to destroy your opponent's fighting spirit without the use for voilent or foul lanuagae. If you only thinking about using scary face, foul lanuage, shouting aloud or use weapon to back up your threat, then you definitely have not understand the truth meaning of intimidation and its effect.

I gather your "understanding" is a recent phenomenon, since you originally wrote this:


You use your facial expression and eyes to generate fear into your opponent. When I fight people for real, my eyes turned red in colour [Really?] and my face have no expression. I also make a lot of noise like shouting.


The effects of intimidation cannot be described with words. To understand it you need to experince it yourself. Until you have experienced yourself, you do not have to believe me.

Spare us the bargain basement Zen, please. Nearly every adult male in the Western world (and no doubt everywhere else) would have experienced attempted or actual intimidation back in the schoolyard.


Please read the The book of five rings, art of war by Sun Tzu and the Chinese classic "The three kingdom" - about one of the battles involving over 8000000 men.

I've read them, and seen your Bruce Lee movie.

Perhaps you should read Geoff Thompson's "Watch my Back" and some of his other books e.g. "The Fence", "The Art of Fighting without Fighting", etc. And also Sanford Strong's "Strong on Defense".