WC vs CLF fight

[Ultimatewingchun]

From 1958:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG_n7I7QUN0

[Ultimatewingchun]

It says that it's a Bruce Lee home movie - but who's the wc guy in the vid? Anybody know?

And the fight, if indicative of a typical wc fight in those days - is very telling.

Not much going on...and the opposition even less so.

WC guy running right into kicks, basically just chain punching. Ouch!

Pulled off a gum sao and punch in the second scene; okay, but the other guy's response was clueless. Saw it coming from a mile away - and still got caught.

Anybody know of any other wc footage from the 50's (or 60's)?

[YungChun]

I thought that kid looked a lot like Bruce...

Also, nothing wrong with punching.. Indeed sometimes that may be all you need.. When I first started learning I found the idea of the WCK punch, how it controlled the line and how, through "chain punching" you could maintain that attack fasinating... In fact, many of the folks that I was sparring at the time were blown down by my using those....

So to me, chain punching isn't just chain punching... It's punching non-stop, which can certainly be useful... One still must use the right timing and distancing, have power, etc.. In fact, punching may be all you need, and if so, then doing any more than simply hitting or punching would be a waste of time, no?

[sihing]

It says that it's a Bruce Lee home movie - but who's the wc guy in the vid? Anybody know?

And the fight, if indicative of a typical wc fight in those days - is very telling.

Not much going on...and the opposition even less so.

WC guy running right into kicks, basically just chain punching. Ouch!

Pulled off a gum sao and punch in the second scene; okay, but the other guy's response was clueless. Saw it coming from a mile away - and still got caught.

Anybody know of any other wc footage from the 50's (or 60's)?

Funny how easy it is to be a Monday morning quarterback:)

What do you want the guy to do to him, put him on the ground and apply a figure four leg lock, lol. The idea is to hit, not look pretty or to adhere to anyone's idea of how to fight. He did just that, hitting the guy, applying pressure and making the guy retreat. It was simple, direct and efficient.

As for who it is, it's not Bruce, but a WSL guy from what I understand. I think he was a newer student as well but I'm not too sure on that one, will have to investigate. I'm pretty positive that Wong was there as well, may have ref'd the fight from what I've read. Plus I was under the impression that the opponent was a mantis stylist of some sort, northern or southern.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

I've seen this same fight listed elsewhere on youtube as mantis kung fu, and taking place in 1961. And at first I thought it was Bruce too, but after watching it a number of times I became convinced it wasn't him.

And like anything else, the newness of something makes it formidable - like the continuous punching on the centerline, whether it's chain punching or whatever variation thereof.

Like William Cheung likes to say: "If you haven't seen it before it's probably going to hit you."

in 1993, with the advent of the UFC, basically nobody knew how to deal with the Brazilian jiu jitsu guard position/game. Remember Royce's first 8-10-12 fights?

The same with wing chun. How do you stop the "machine gun approach" to punching? Do you remember when that was the question? But what I was looking at was the ease with which the wc guy was getting kicked, and he even fell down a few times - and with his hands held extremely low.

By todays's standards you can't say you're impressed by this fight - can you?

And something else: go back and spend the entire vid watching the CLF guy. He's got basically nothing going.

[YungChun]

By todays's standards you can't say you're impressed by this fight - can you?


IMO... This "fight" could have happened yesterday if you picked the right two teens from a couple of different schools... They're kids, learning, as much as they are doing... It wouldn't surprise me if this was how Bruce would have fought at the same level..

There were also some basic elements of WCK there and they were sufficient to allow the WCK kid to dominate... Despite the 'slip' ... :)

No the other guy had nothing esp since his space kept disappearing..

[Ultimatewingchun]

"They're kids, learning, as much as they are doing... It wouldn't surprise me if this was how Bruce would have fought at the same level."


***I'M SURE OF IT.

And William, and Wong, and all the others too. At some point.

Just curious about what other "points" these guys were at back in the old Hong Kong days. Hence my reason for posting the thread and asking the question:

"Anybody know of any other wc footage from the 50's (or 60's)"?

[Liddel]

Today you see someone recieve a head kick and all they do is cover - its accepted as a 'block' and no one mentions it anymore.

Vic - the VT guy looks to be doing the same, the camera angles block your view but if you look closely at the body it "looks" as though hes making tiny responces to the kicks be it a shift of weight or a check if you will...and yes the Gum at one point.

The thing that strikes me, Tong Long or CLF, is the skpping and/or hopping which serves no purpose. That guy really had nothing. He needed so much room to swing his punches and the foward pressure of the VT guy meant he had no space. Even when he raises a leg for a kick (which looks to land) he only pushes himself over off the VT guy.

Most of the fighting back then as told to me by my Sifu, envolved only body shots unless both parties agreed otherwise, where as this seems to have head shots. Perhaps the VT fighter was just showing a habbit from other fights with his low hands, who knows.

[CFT]

The Wing Chun guy is a WSLVT practitioner (now a sifu) - Wu Chan Nam. I've seen photos, either pre- or post-fight, and they pose with arms round shoulders so it was a "friendly" match as far as I can work out.

See this link and search for "Wun Chan Nam".
http://www.wcarchive.com/html/wing-chun-movies.htm

[B-Rad]

Yup!

From when I first posted this as "Wing Chun vs. Choy Lay Fut" a couple years ago:


Hi, Brad

Again, in the interests of historical accuracy, the stocky Wing Chun guy knocking his Praying Mantis (not CLF.....there is another film of a bloodier fight in a sort of basement carpark like structure where the WC guy prevails over his CLF opponent in a less one sided match) opponent around is none other than Wu Chun Nam sifu, still teaching today and a member of the recently formed AVTA (Authentic Ving Tsun Association).

Wu was Wong Shun Leung's first personal student and the man who sort of interviewed and "vetted" me one week before giving me the OK to begin training under Wong sifu, way back in the winter of 1964!

I may very well have been the first foreigner to see that movie (I had to borrow my father's 8mm projector for the showing). Unless, my memory is faulty, I remember the bout went on for a bit longer than what the clip shows, and ended with the Mantis guy throwing a snap front kick that Wu blocked with a Gahn Sao so powerful that the Mantis guy was spun around on his supporting leg, allowing Wu to punch his opponent in the back, thus ending the fight.

Regards.

Rolf

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36719

[t_niehoff]

"They're kids, learning, as much as they are doing... It wouldn't surprise me if this was how Bruce would have fought at the same level."

***I'M SURE OF IT.

And William, and Wong, and all the others too. At some point.


Back in the mid 80's one of my training partners (who, at that the time, was living in Australia and training with Cheung) asked WSL how William Cheung won his fights, if he did anything "different" (e.g., secret footwork). Wong replied that "he did what we all did" and just demonstrated the chain punches and charging steps.

That strategy (charging in with chain punches) worked because the people they were fighting were poor (and poorly trained) fighters. When the WCK people later went and fought the Thai's, who were good, well-trained fighters, they were easily beaten.

Fighting skill is developed (and maintained) mainly from fighting (sparring), and people improve by fighting with/against better people. The rooftop fights was the "white belt" division of gung fu fighting. Those that went on to fight better opponent's got better; those who didn't, stayed the same or got worse (through lack of fighting).




Just curious about what other "points" these guys were at back in the old Hong Kong days. Hence my reason for posting the thread and asking the question:

"Anybody know of any other wc footage from the 50's (or 60's)"?

Hawkins has some rooftop footage. I think he put some of it on his DVDs.

[monji112000]

Originally Posted by t_niehoff

Back in the mid 80's one of my training partners (who, at that the time, was living in Australia and training with Cheung) asked WSL how William Cheung won his fights, if he did anything "different" (e.g., secret footwork). Wong replied that "he did what we all did" and just demonstrated the chain punches and charging steps.

That strategy (charging in with chain punches) worked because the people they were fighting were poor (and poorly trained) fighters. When the WCK people later went and fought the Thai's, who were good, well-trained fighters, they were easily beaten.

Fighting skill is developed (and maintained) mainly from fighting (sparring), and people improve by fighting with/against better people. The rooftop fights was the "white belt" division of gung fu fighting. Those that went on to fight better opponent's got better; those who didn't, stayed the same or got worse (through lack of fighting).



not everyone lost to the thai boxers. Not everyone just used chain punching. Ip Man had allot of students and some disciples. Allot of fights were at schools too not just roof tops.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Back in the mid 80's one of my training partners (who, at that the time, was living in Australia and training with Cheung) asked WSL how William Cheung won his fights, if he did anything "different" (e.g., secret footwork). Wong replied that "he did what we all did" and just demonstrated the chain punches and charging steps.

That strategy (charging in with chain punches) worked because the people they were fighting were poor (and poorly trained) fighters. When the WCK people later went and fought the Thai's, who were good, well-trained fighters, they were easily beaten.

Fighting skill is developed (and maintained) mainly from fighting (sparring), and people improve by fighting with/against better people. The rooftop fights was the "white belt" division of gung fu fighting. Those that went on to fight better opponent's got better; those who didn't, stayed the same or got worse (through lack of fighting).





Hawkins has some rooftop footage. I think he put some of it on his DVDs.


Good points, though why everyone likes to pick on Thai boxers is beyond me, even the Kyokushin guys like to go over there and get beaten up.
:D

[t_niehoff]

not everyone lost to the thai boxers. Not everyone just used chain punching. Ip Man had allot of students and some disciples. Allot of fights were at schools too not just roof tops.


Tell us who beat the Thai boxers.

[Vajramusti]

RE: Internet forums including KFO.
In the process of chit chat and egos---oft repeated part truths and half truths
can end up with the appearance of "Fact".

joy chaudhuri

[t_niehoff]

RE: Internet forums including KFO.
In the process of chit chat and egos---oft repeated part truths and half truths
can end up with the appearance of "Fact".

joy chaudhuri

Tell us who beat the Thai boxers.

[Vajramusti]

Why?

In a context of serious discussion-sometime-maybe.

In the context of predictable internet chit chat- not necessary.

Have fun.

joy chaudhuri

[sihing]

Tell us who beat the Thai boxers.

Well Sifu Lam had a situation with the Thai guys. One year he trained some VT people to fight with them, and they lost. He then went to Thailand, trained with them for awhile, came back, trained his guys and then fought them again. From what he has said they won the majority of the fights, but not all of them. He has said to me, Thai Boxing is king of the ring, Ving Tsun is king of the street, I believe him. He had/has a school in HK that teaches both VT and Thai Boxing, so I don't know the details of what they were using when they fought the second time (T and Knifey you probably will think MT, we know this :) ). IMO, he just had them train harder and more along the lines of what they would be facing in the ring, instead of the traditional way of dealing with things, which makes perfect sense in ring fighting. On the street we don't have that luxury of knowing who we are fighting and what their strengths/weaknesses are, so the strategy and tactics are different.

James

[Knifefighter]

On the street we don't have that luxury of knowing who we are fighting and what their strengths/weaknesses are, so the strategy and tactics are different.

What do you think the differences in strategies and tactics between the two are?

[sihing]

What do you think the differences in strategies and tactics between the two are?

You tell me, your the expert right :)

[Knifefighter]

You tell me, your the expert right :)

You are the one making the pronouncements, although you don't do either street or ring.

Why is it the people making these pronouncements between ring and street are usually the least qualified to do so?

[sihing]

You are the one making the pronouncements, although you don't do either street or ring.

Why is it the people making these pronouncements between ring and street are usually the least qualified to do so?

So in other words I have no right to state my opinion. Since when did you become judge and jury on who has the right to state what they think Dale? Whether or not I'm full of sh!t, don't know what I'm talking about, I can still state what I feel regarding a subject. You guys come off so all superior sometimes in your attitudes that it makes one want to stay away from places like this.

Anyone with any common sense can realize that the ring and the street are two different places. If someone gets in my face you think I'm actually going to square off with them like in the ring. Why? Why give them the chance. Most attacks you don't even know are coming your way, as they are sucker attacks. How is that the same as the ring? Just the fact that there is no rules make the biggest difference. I'm not saying ring fighters can't deal with street stuff either, it is just two different enviroments based totally on the unpredicability of who you are fighting, where you are fighting and the cirumstance's involved (is your opponent alone or with a group of people, are there weapons involved).

Hopefully I've given enough reasons to satisfy your standards Dale:p

I'm outta here..

James

[Knifefighter]

So in other words I have no right to state my opinion. Since when did you become judge and jury on who has the right to state what they think Dale?
Someone who states erroneous beliefs about things they have no experience with should be called on those things by people who do have experience in those things.

You think studying your opponent beforehand is somehow a "luxury" that gives you an advantage? Well, guess again, because your opponent is just as intently studying all your strengths and weaknesses so that he can avoid the former and capitalize on the latter.

Are there differences between the ring and the street? Of course there are. I just cracks me up when I hear someone making pronouncements about training in a system they think is somehow "king of the streets" while they practice "street style" techniques in the safety of their training studio against mostly complying training buddies.

I know from first hand experience how hard it is to train in "sports" styles, how much sacrifice it takes, how many injuries have to be endured, and, ultimately, how much carryover that training has to "the streets"- which is much more that the "self-defense" guys will ever realize.

You'd be surprised at how, in the adrenaline/threat overload of a street encounter, all the "self-defense/street" tactics go right out the window because they haven't been trained against an opponent who is trying his utmost to take you completetly out.

[sihing]

Are there differences between the ring and the street? Of course there are. I just cracks me up when I hear someone making pronouncements about training in a system they think is somehow "king of the streets" while they practice "street style" techniques in the safety of their training studio against mostly complying training buddies.

I know from first hand experience how hard it is to train in "sports" styles, how much sacrifice it takes, how many injuries have to be endured, and, ultimately, how much carryover that training has to "the streets"- which is much more that the "self-defense" guys will ever realize.

And when did I say that your training, and what you train in doesn't work either? I don't recall ever saying that. Or is that you are reading into something when I said that Sifu Lam made the statement "VT is the king of the streets". I also stated that I agree with him. Of course this is just my opinion based on what I have experienced, and it is his opinion based on his experiences. That must bother you alot, according to your post above. In the end it is not about the system, but about the people using what they have learned, some can and some can't use it. That applies to every MA as well.

Believe me when I say this Dale, I have no illusions as to how effective or uneffective what I do in the class is. All of us are vulnerable, defeatable, it makes me laugh just to say that. The greatest self defense strategy I have learned from VT is to avoid physical violence at all costs, how about you Dale, have you learned that lesson? Some will say that they have no choice but to fight, it just comes their way, well all I have to say is that I've lived in western world like the rest of us for 38 years and have rarely had any problems with people in public places, drunk or sober. I've also worked security for years and the same can be said there. Like I said before, 99% of the reason why I practice and teach VT is because I enjoy it. You could be the best streetfighter in the world for all I care, I still wouldn't join your school, or want you as my teacher, as I'm not interested in what you have to offer.

They say MMA produces less ego in people, so far IMO I haven't seen the evidence to support that yet and your not helping.

Enjoy being king of the hill Dale, I hope it gives you what you want :)

James

[Knifefighter]

Enjoy being king of the hill Dale, I hope it gives you what you want :)

James-
It has nothing to do with being king of the hill and everything to do with being irritated at hearing someone pontificate about things they know nothing about- especially when that nothing is something I have 30 years experience actually doing.

[sihing]

James-
It has nothing to do with being king of the hill and everything to do with being irritated at hearing someone pontificate about things they know nothing about- especially when that nothing is something I have 30 years experience actually doing.

Dale,

You gotta love the way you express things. The way you make it out to be is that I'm some 6yr old kindergarden kid, just realising some independence in my life, lol. And there's you, the grand poo ba of all Martial Arts and Self defense tactics. I don't recall ever saying anything in relation about you and your abilities. You know nothing about me, just that I don't compete in Martial Arts and avoid violence. You would think that I would have learned something about how to relate to people in my 38yrs on this planet (in other words how to avoid fights), and about self defense in my19yrs of Martial Arts, but of course according to your standards all of this is absolute theory and conjecture on my part. Please continue to believe this if it makes you feel better. Let me just say that I've had plenty of opportunity to use the skills that I have, but for whatever reason things worked out in a non violent manner. I've never claimed to be a good or great fighter, nor do I think I have all the answers. I train and teach VT, have students that for some strange reason believe in what I tell them, and am looking forward to learning more about the VT I am training in now. The facts of the matter are this, I know little about you and what you have been through in your life, the same goes for what you know about me. If you think that I am proclaiming something that is supposed to be absolute truth to everyone on the planet, that is your problem not mine. I am only expressing what I believe to be true, in relation to a topic of conversation. I don't expect everyone to agree with it. This is a forum, a place where people are allowed to talk about things Wing Chun related (why you, a MMA BJJ person populates this place is beyond my comprehension), and regardless of what you think about us skill wise, we can post all we want, right or wrong.

James

[YungChun]

This is a great Forum.. :cool::eek::confused::o

Folks talking about who can say or should say what, why they should/shouldn't say it and why what they say is/is not worth a crap, or why we do/don't give a crap... And backing it up with a variety of facts/lies/distortions and holy truths...

Almost no discussion regarding the actual 'things' folks have, every right/no business discussing...

Oye..:rolleyes:

[monji112000]

Tell us who beat the Thai boxers.

Go do your own research.

The fact is that Thai fighters had a major advantage over CMA fighters. their training methods were much more modern and effective compared to most CMA schools. The few schools who did use more modern methods and training drills did compete and did do well. These schools and people aren't the majority. Even in recent modern times with MMA, western /thai boxing sports events CMA have won whole devisions and tournaments. Its not like its a common thing, or a prominent thing.. but it has and does happen.

If someone like me can talk to the right people and read the books, finding the facts for "smarter" people should be pretty simple.. but that would require using something other than google and youtube.

the people who talk the most and the loudest have nothing but hot air to say. The people with the nice juicy stories don't talk much, and don't have major organizations.

JMO

[t_niehoff]

Go do your own research.

The fact is that Thai fighters had a major advantage over CMA fighters. their training methods were much more modern and effective compared to most CMA schools. The few schools who did use more modern methods and training drills did compete and did do well. These schools and people aren't the majority. Even in recent modern times with MMA, western /thai boxing sports events CMA have won whole devisions and tournaments. Its not like its a common thing, or a prominent thing.. but it has and does happen.

If someone like me can talk to the right people and read the books, finding the facts for "smarter" people should be pretty simple.. but that would require using something other than google and youtube.

the people who talk the most and the loudest have nothing but hot air to say. The people with the nice juicy stories don't talk much, and don't have major organizations.

JMO


It's easy to come on a forum and say WCK people have beaten MT fighters. If so, give me specifics I can check. You made the claim, you provide the evidence. I could spend my whole life looking for evidence that doesn't exist.

I'm sure CMAists have won tournaments; tournaments of CMAists. ;) Someone had to win.

Yes, MT fighters train more effectively than people in CMAs. And that's primary in terms of developing skill. But an important consequence of training as they do (and fighting) is that your method evolves, becomes more effective, etc. -- more effective training methods make more effective fighting methods.

Yes, there are lots of juicy stories. Too bad most aren't true.

[Knifefighter]

I don't recall ever saying anything in relation about you and your abilities. You know nothing about me, just that I don't compete in Martial Arts and avoid violence.

My comments are not related to anything you have said about me. They are related to your continued ignorant proclamations about sport fighting.


You would think that I would have learned something about how to relate to people in my 38yrs on this planet (in other words how to avoid fights), and about self defense in my19yrs of Martial Arts, but of course according to your standards all of this is absolute theory and conjecture on my part.

Please do post your experiences on how you avoid fights and settle things in non-violent manners. Those are valid experiences and I'm sure there is valuable information to shared be based on those experiences.

The problem as I see it is that you don't post about those types of things in which you have expertise to share. Instead, you post about things in which you have no first-hand experience, but only theoretical speculation.



This is a forum, a place where people are allowed to talk about things Wing Chun related (why you, a MMA BJJ person populates this place is beyond my comprehension), and regardless of what you think about us skill wise, we can post all we want, right or wrong.

And I can post all I want about how full of sh!t you are when you pontificate about street vs. sport.

[anerlich]

This match looked to be of about the standard you'd find in any CMA school that spars. The WC guy certainly seemed to have the better of it, but this is a sparring match between two intermediate level trainees, not some stylistic clash of the titans. No protective gear, and no one was really trying to do any damage.

Like every thread, we have KF and T pontificating on aliveness and sportfighting. I agree, but am getting pretty jack of it taking over every thread. Can't you guys put up a blog, links to SBG's site in your .sig, or a sticky thread, rather than repeat yourselves over and over in every thread?

[Knifefighter]

Like every thread, we have KF and T pontificating on aliveness and sportfighting. I agree, but am getting pretty jack of it taking over every thread. Can't you guys put up a blog, links to SBG's site in your .sig, or a sticky thread, rather than repeat yourselves over and over in every thread?

Or maybe James could just do the same thing regarding his pontificating about how the street is different from sport.

[monji112000]

It's easy to come on a forum and say WCK people have beaten MT fighters. If so, give me specifics I can check. You made the claim, you provide the evidence. I could spend my whole life looking for evidence that doesn't exist.

I'm sure CMAists have won tournaments; tournaments of CMAists. ;) Someone had to win.

Yes, MT fighters train more effectively than people in CMAs. And that's primary in terms of developing skill. But an important consequence of training as they do (and fighting) is that your method evolves, becomes more effective, etc. -- more effective training methods make more effective fighting methods.

Yes, there are lots of juicy stories. Too bad most aren't true.
. What do think this is 20/20?
its just as easy to say that a CMA can't and never has won a fight against a good MT fighter or MMA. I made the claim, and I have no way of empirically proving it. Do you honestly think that every fight stat is recorded in the USA? SO many MMA , boxing, and MT fights happen at NONE CMA tournaments that aren't recorded. Thats just in the USA in modern times. What about the 30 years in places like Thailand.
Its biggest load of crap that nobody ever wins in Thailand. They have been feeding people like you that BS story for many years.

I often wonder why such keyboard warriors hold so strong to their trolling panties...? maybe its the lack of maturing? or experience? people tend to have strong views when they haven't experienced much.

Yah CMA people win fights at NONE CMA tournaments, its not often but it happens. If you are too shallow to think that a good fighter from a CMA background like sanda , CLF, or Applied Wing Chun couldn't win a fight.. have fun pretending your ramon dekker.

[Liddel]

Tell us who beat the Thai boxers.

My Sifu told me of a time he won against a thai Boxer in Singapore.
He showed me the photos of pre and post fight, he fought TB's on a few occasions.(not all wins BTW)

He won by using his punching and a front kick to drop his opponent.

He got back to his hotel room after the fight and pulled down his trousers to see that his thighs were black and blue. Which is how we got onto the subject because you could see the bruises on his thighs and knuckles in the photos, which made me ask what led to them being like that.

My sifu after teaching for close to 10 years, fought on many continents in asia in the late 60's to early 80's, with good results and im not so arrogant to think hes the only one.....

He had some good stories about WSL fights, TST and even Lok Yiu (which is rare, he didnt fight as often as the younger generation of his time)

He also intimated to me, that the Masters of different KF styles that VT fighters went up against in the 50's and 60's, were of reasonable ability and NOT Poor fighters as you put it T (by those days standards). It was just VT was more direct and agressive and it gave them the tools to overcome other KF styles if used properly.

If we looked at it today, yeah they dont really measure up....but you could say that about anything really, home computers and the space programme, modern cars the list goes on.....

WTF does it really prove...

Just for the record T, are you of the opinion, that if you trained in the 50's and 60's and got involved in one of these types of fights (the one in the vid) youd be any better or worse ?

....speculate if you want, Im curious ?

DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

There are certain posts going on here that I don't read - but I see what's going on because of the way others are responding - and one thing that I can say about the difference between the two systems that wing chun fighters need to take into account is this: the Thai roundhouse kick to the back of the thigh.

Don't expect as a wing chun guy that you can just "walk in" on this kick and thereby bypass it's wheelhouse zone - and timing it for a stop-kick is a hit-or-miss situation as well as the Thai setups for this kick are good.

In TWC, William Cheung not only uses the same kick but has taught a variation of the block that Thai itself uses, ie.- lifting the leg getting kicked at. The difference being they (the Thai's, and the Kyokushin guys also) - take it on the shin bone - whereas we try to take it on the side of the calf.

But lifting the leg is a must - otherwise your thigh is just a stationary sitting duck target.

And the same with covering all gates , including lifting a leg - when the Thai high roundhouse kick is coming. Don't expect to just walk on this either (although it's easier than when it's the low kick to the leg - and the full sidestep used in TWC is also good at times...but being prepared to completely BLOCK while lifting a leg and blocking middle and high gates with the arms are the principle Defense when he gets the kick off and past your ability to attack first or stop-kick.

These are the major differences that the wing chun fighter needs to adjust to - along with the focus on consistent hard sparring.

Details...

are better than a troll war of words.

And the collar ties and knees that the Thai's use (and elbow shots to the head, face, temple,etc.) - have to be trained against...wing chun has answers (and similar moves)...but spending lots of time training against the Thai variations are a must - as the Thai's really focus heavy duty on these kinds of attacks.

And training HARD and TOUGH like they do is the single biggest key. Their conditioning and hard sparring/fighting regimen is awesome - waaay beyond what wing chun is normally known to do. So taking a page out of their playbook in this regard is paramount.

[Liddel]

In TWC, William Cheung not only uses the same kick but has taught a variation of the block that Thai itself uses, ie.- lifting the leg getting kicked at. The difference being they (the Thai's, and the Kyokushin guys also) - take it on the shin bone - whereas we try to take it on the side of the calf.

This action should be present in other VT Lineages also.

For me it is contained in CK and is performed before launching the side kick in section three of the form.

The emphasis for us, is on having a turning motion of your leg (only inches) from inside to out adding a little torque and the touch point can either be on the shin or the calf depending on the angle/s of the round kick etc.

DREW

[anerlich]

My job is to correct the clueless who make stupid statements regarding BJJ and MMA when they have absolutely no experience with either... a job that will never be finished.



So, how's self employment (after self-appointment)? I'll bet the pay sucks, though you're right about the job security.

We don't really need two of you, so could you see about getting Terence sacked? Some (though not me of course :p ) may have the opinion he qualifies as one of the clueless you wish to correct, and on such basis he is unqualified. As an amateur researcher in thiese areas, noting the differences between you and him, I note that experience and sheer volume of verbiage are inversely proportional.

BTW ... just a friendly heads up ... your first job performance review may not go quite as you expect. Lot of ingrates out there.

[Edmund]

Details...

are better than a troll war of words.


You aren't missing a lot of details by using your "ignore" function.

Terence has never offered any info concerning MT that I can recall.
Or BJJ come to think of it.




And the collar ties and knees that the Thai's use (and elbow shots to the head, face, temple,etc.) - have to be trained against...wing chun has answers (and similar moves)...but spending lots of time training against the Thai variations are a must - as the Thai's really focus heavy duty on these kinds of attacks.

And training HARD and TOUGH like they do is the single biggest key. Their conditioning and hard sparring/fighting regimen is awesome - waaay beyond what wing chun is normally known to do. So taking a page out of their playbook in this regard is paramount.

I agree.
If a WCer doesn't train against techniques like MT ones, in a real fight they aren't going to be ready for them if they ever occur.

Charging in and punching against kicks can work provided you do a little bit of defence as well.

[t_niehoff]

My Sifu told me of a time he won against a thai Boxer in Singapore.
He showed me the photos of pre and post fight, he fought TB's on a few occasions.(not all wins BTW)

He won by using his punching and a front kick to drop his opponent.

He got back to his hotel room after the fight and pulled down his trousers to see that his thighs were black and blue. Which is how we got onto the subject because you could see the bruises on his thighs and knuckles in the photos, which made me ask what led to them being like that.

My sifu after teaching for close to 10 years, fought on many continents in asia in the late 60's to early 80's, with good results and im not so arrogant to think hes the only one.....


OK, I see, we have him telling you he won. Now, is there any way to verify this? They do, I believe, keep records of MT matches. Perhaps if you could provide the name of the fighter whom he beat, the place, etc. so we could check.



He had some good stories about WSL fights, TST and even Lok Yiu (which is rare, he didnt fight as often as the younger generation of his time)

He also intimated to me, that the Masters of different KF styles that VT fighters went up against in the 50's and 60's, were of reasonable ability and NOT Poor fighters as you put it T (by those days standards). It was just VT was more direct and agressive and it gave them the tools to overcome other KF styles if used properly.


I think it has nothing to do with "style" (with WCK being better than anything else), but more with aggression -- typically, if evenly matched, the more aggressive fighter will win (even with poor fighters).

Moreover, I also think there is much 'counting the hits and not the misses' going on here.



If we looked at it today, yeah they dont really measure up....but you could say that about anything really, home computers and the space programme, modern cars the list goes on.....

WTF does it really prove...


It's not quite the same thing. MT "measured up" even then. So did some other methods. Of course, all good fighting arts evolve and grow, both in terms of training and application.

But my point in all this is that these guys weren't very good fighters, even by that time periods "standards". So I don't think it wise to look to them for answers. Looking to poor fighters for how to fight isn't a rescipe for success.



Just for the record T, are you of the opinion, that if you trained in the 50's and 60's and got involved in one of these types of fights (the one in the vid) youd be any better or worse ?

....speculate if you want, Im curious ?

DREW

It depends on what I was training in, doesn't it? But I get your point: they developed the best they could with what they had. OK, fine. But today we know more, we know they weren't that good, we know that how they trained wasn't that effective, etc. The best of them developed the ability to beat really poor fighters. So my view is that we should take everything they say with a huge grain of salt, and not as gospel. And many of the "masters" teaching WCK never even reached that level of development.

[t_niehoff]

I note that experience and sheer volume of verbiage are inversely proportional.


Interesting perspective from someone with over 3400 posts. As I have only 1600 posts, does this mean I have twice the experience as you? ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am sure that somewhere, somehow, a WC fighter beat a MT fighter, its not inconceivable.

Sport combat, FULL contact sport combat, is the closest to e real fight anyone can get, outside a REAL fight.
The skill and mindset transference is there, even more so if the sport practioners understands the difference between street and ring.

Sport fighters are taught to hit hard, hit fast and finish the job, the key ingredients for survival on the street.

The biggest mistake many people make is that or awareness and intent and that is a something that BOTH TMA and sport combat are guilty of.

[anerlich]

Interesting perspective from someone with over 3400 posts.

I'm glad you find my perspective interesting. Yours ceased to be so some time ago.


As I have only 1600 posts, does this mean I have twice the experience as you?

Your own activities indicate that in your opinion you are vastly more experienced, knowledgable, and interesting, even when repeating yourself or other people, than anyone else on the forum. I venture that such opinions are not widely shared, judging from the responses you receive.

In coming to such an evaluation of postal verbiage, you would probably need to also consider our respective lifetimes on the board, and length, redundancy, and signal-to-noise ratio of posts. Posts per day might be a more useful measure of verbiage in this context, though the other factors remain a matter of opinion. Fell free to solicit same from your fellow posters.

The sample size (KF/you) is of course too small to be statistically valid, but my purpose was not to chase statistical validity. Rather to perhaps get you to reflect on your motives for hijacking nearly every thread and turning it into an aliveness/fighting/theoretician monologue. No doubt a futile effort, but grant me some naive optimism.

:p

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Rather to perhaps get you to reflect on your motives for hijacking nearly every thread and turning it into an aliveness/fighting/theoretician monologue. No doubt a futile effort, but grant me some naive optimism." (Anerlich)


:p

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


Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! (That might be the funniest two sentences ever posted on this forum). :D

[Liddel]

OK, I see, we have him telling you he won. Now, is there any way to verify this? They do, I believe, keep records of MT matches. Perhaps if you could provide the name of the fighter whom he beat, the place, etc. so we could check.

"They do, i believe keep records" ... Terrence :rolleyes: first, please provide independently verifiable evidence every MT fight in Singapore is recorded.
Once verified they...DO, then ill endeavour to recover these records. Ill take a page from your book on that one and not rely on your "belief"

While on your search - get the records to back this up to -


When the WCK people later went and fought the Thai's, who were good, well-trained fighters, they were easily beaten.

I dont doubt VT fighters lost...and won... might as well kill two birds with one stone, and also apply the same scrutiny to yourself...

And just for 'the record', as usual i wasnt seeking approval from you or anyone on the validity of the "story" ;). your opinion makes no difference to my fighting ability nor your own. I just dont want people brain washed into thinking MT fighters never loose against VT - which is in essence what your intimating.

Keep trolling everyone else, im laughing at this to :D

DREW

[jesper]

No no you got it all wrong liddel

MT is the be all, while WC sucks. Which is ofcourse why he trains MT instead of WC uhm I mean........

[Wang Kiu lineag]

It says that it's a Bruce Lee home movie - but who's the wc guy in the vid? Anybody know?

And the fight, if indicative of a typical wc fight in those days - is very telling.

Not much going on...and the opposition even less so.

WC guy running right into kicks, basically just chain punching. Ouch!

Pulled off a gum sao and punch in the second scene; okay, but the other guy's response was clueless. Saw it coming from a mile away - and still got caught.

Anybody know of any other wc footage from the 50's (or 60's)?

Hello everybody,

The fight you see in from 1961, it's the same as where I have pictures from in high quality.
The Wing Chun guy in this video is Sifu Wu (Wu Chan Nam). He was a student of Sifu Wong Shun Leung in that time. The rooftop fight was organised by Sifu Wang Kiu and Sifu Wong Shun Leung, both then training under Yip Man.

When you look closely you can see that the referee in the right is Sifu Wang Kiu (at the right side of the video walking). I asked Sifu Wang Kiu about this particular fight and he told me that this opponent was from the Prayin Mantis style. They challenged all kinds of martial arts back then with those illegal fights on the rooftops of some hotels. Most of the times there were some journalists present (invited) so they could make an article afterwards.

The journalist in this fight was called Wah Ting Wang from the Ming Pao newspaper of Hong Kong.
If there's someone living in Hong Kong and could check if there's an archive from this newspaper company, I'll be very interested. Maybe we can get some copies of those days!

If people are interested in pictures of this particulary fight, please contact me at wangkiu@hotmail.com

[Vajramusti]

There were other fights- inter lineage and inter style- that were not filmed back in those days. Making generalizations on all fights ...problematic

joy chaudhuri

[Wang Kiu lineag]

There were other fights- inter lineage and inter style- that were not filmed back in those days. Making generalizations on all fights ...problematic

joy chaudhuri

Hi Joy,

I don't know if you referring to my post. I just wanted to share information about this particular fight. It's a fact that in the 50's and 60's those Hong Kong rooftop fights were done by just a few of all the Wing Chun students of Yip Man. The best known is Sifu Wong Shun Leung, but also others like Sifu Wang Kiu, Sifu Wu, William Cheung and some others. Not all of those fights were spectacular, as you can see on this video also. How many fights there were is not to say, at least not 100's...

Off course there were many fights in those days, like there were in the last 1000 years.

[Vajramusti]

My intent is civil but I am ina bit of a hurry- gotts go far to see grandkids.

1. Wang Kiu is not the historian in residence.No disrespect intended.

2. Not all fights were filmed- they didn't have You Tube in mind.

3. There were people who began right after WSL whose students fought
other styles. Some were more injurious than the film that you showed.

4. BTW--- Sugar Ray Robinson's real speed were in his lightweight and early welter days... most of his films are from middleweight days- many when he was past his prime.

Joy Chaudhuri

[Wang Kiu lineag]

My intent is civil but I am ina bit of a hurry- gotts go far to see grandkids.

1. Wang Kiu is not the historian in residence.No disrespect intended.

2. Not all fights were filmed- they didn't have You Tube in mind.

3. There were people who began right after WSL whose students fought
other styles. Some were more injurious than the film that you showed.

Joy Chaudhuri

You are right. But I wasn't saying Sifu Wang Kiu is the historian, but he did tell me about this particular fight because he was there and from his own reference he could tell me about many other fights, but again not all off course.

Not all fights were filmed, let that be: a few fights were filmed from all of them, because taping in that time was very expensive and Wing Chun wasn't always the news of the day

[John Takeshi]

I didn't like this video, personally. I do not feel that the Wing Chun fighter properly displayed the mantis foundations of WC with any kind of solid understanding.