Because we deserve it . . .

[t_niehoff]

. . . September is _ing __un sucks month at Bullshido! A well-earned pat on the back to you all. And as a treat, someone made this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7KxuDYfpSQ

which, unfortunately, can't even begin to include all the "best" stuff (there is just too much gold out there, and seems to be growing exponentially). So if you or your group was ignored, don't feel slighted or left out. I'm sure the time will come when you will be recognized.

And let's not forget the debt we owe our grandmasters: without them leading the way, we couldn't have done it. Fortunately they have passed down (transmitted) "the real secrets" (TM) of fighting and training that have gotten us to this point. We've done a great job keeping that tradition alive.

Please, keep up the good work! Keep doing those forms and the chi sao. Preserve those "concepts" and "principles" that have taken us so far.

[YungChun]

Although there was some really good dancing in the video, most of the practitioners were not "sitting" in their "horses" correctly so as to deliver maximum power..

Here we see a couple of Grandm___ers, showing how it's done:

Also note the correct use of Biu Sao to intercept..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiFyOV1HW1Y

:D

Who says Grandm___ers don't fight?
Chung Choy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhkXh4oo_k0
Clinch work/anti grappling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X17hM-0iZl0

ChiSao:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hg-lNDjYU-U

[planetwc]

who gives a $hit what bullshid* thinks about Wing Chun?

After viewing THEIR last road trip replete with references to guns and weed, steroid women on probation, they are the last ones to talk. Internet challenges gone wild.

What kind of rational person does some massive road trip to exchange insults in a parking lot with racist low lifes?

Perhaps Bullshido should take a look in the mirror and clean up their own act before sticking their noses elsewhere.

[Matrix]

. . . September is _ing __un sucks month at Bullshido! A well-earned pat on the back to you all. And as a treat, someone made this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7KxuDYfpSQTerence,
I'm just wondering if the "someone" who put the video together is you?
I think it's pretty funny, and your dripping sarcasm only makes it more so.

Bill

[Matrix]

JUst to prove that they're equal opportunity critics, here's the Bullshido MMA sucks video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3DsY6bCxaA

[Matrix]

Terence,

Here are a few Bullshido "throwdowns".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAHskgq8HUU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAHskgq8HUU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABDqzwLsCe0

What's that saying about people in glass houses? ;)

[Wayfaring]

. . . September is _ing __un sucks month at Bullshido! A well-earned pat on the back to you all. And as a treat, someone made this video:


And don't forget to include yourself in all of the kudos. After all, you do a bang-up job with the underground anonymous wing chun training.

[southernkf]

Hello Terence,

based on your other posts it seems you have deep passion for wing chun. That is good. Criticism is good. Yip Man asked his students not to trust his words and Wong Sheung Leung (and others) fought a lot of people, thus proveing his wing chun.

The question I have is the question why you train in wing chun? By this I don't mean to question why you study an art that is so apparently feable, by others accounts. I am sure you don't think that else you wouldn't be practicing it. But rather, why you trust what your teacher and his teacher says? Yip Man wasn't known as a fighter and had little experience proving his art to anyone, atleast compared to todays standards. Several of his students did test it out, but again these seem far from serious encounters and most would probably fail miserably in MMA events. I don't mean to sound disrespectful or to be petty, but it does beg the question how you respect your teacher and how you feel about his skills and how you justify learning from him? This isn't so much a slight to him, but a question for you on how you may reconcile this? Perhaps we all can learn.

[anerlich]

The MMA one was funnier.

In their Pimp My Gi video one of my BJJ coaches appears in a still with his coach, two UFC competitors, and another Machado black belt.

Definitely equal opportunity.

For real laughs, I guess we're going to have to wait for that oft requested but never delivered vid of Terence sparring - sorry, FIGHTING - or perhaps just his reaction of fright, disappointment, and despair to catching his reflection in a mirror.

You look for laughs in anything you'll find them. Look for the inept, depressing and moronic in anything you can find that by the bucketload as well. It's your choice whether you filter for the 10% that's good or spend your time wallowing in the 90% that's sh1t. The latter is much easier, and has Terence has demonstrated, requires only a keyboard, not talent, intelligence, imagination, perseverence or determination.

[Liddel]

We dont require lengthy posts about T - The guys a D1CK - END OF !

[t_niehoff]

Although there was some really good dancing in the video, most of the practitioners were not "sitting" in their "horses" correctly so as to deliver maximum power..

Here we see a couple of Grandm___ers, showing how it's done:

Also note the correct use of Biu Sao to intercept..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiFyOV1HW1Y

:D

Who says Grandm___ers don't fight?
Chung Choy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhkXh4oo_k0
Clinch work/anti grappling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X17hM-0iZl0

ChiSao:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hg-lNDjYU-U

It's great to see the "lineage holders" show what they can really do! As we can plainly see, the forms and chi sao have worked for them. I was particularly impressed by the grandmother that used the central-line instead of the centerline.

[t_niehoff]

Terence,
I'm just wondering if the "someone" who put the video together is you?
I think it's pretty funny, and your dripping sarcasm only makes it more so.

Bill

No, I didn't make the video. I'm not part of the bullshido community.

[AmanuJRY]

I was particularly impressed by the grandmother that used the central-line instead of the centerline.

Now that's just splitting hairs, man....:rolleyes:

[t_niehoff]

Hello Terence,

based on your other posts it seems you have deep passion for wing chun. That is good. Criticism is good. Yip Man asked his students not to trust his words and Wong Sheung Leung (and others) fought a lot of people, thus proveing his wing chun.


No, they didn't "prove" his WCK -- those that fought proved that they had a certrain level of skill (better than the people they fought with - which, btw, had very low levels of skill).

But I do agree with you that Yip's advice was proper.



The question I have is the question why you train in wing chun? By this I don't mean to question why you study an art that is so apparently feable, by others accounts. I am sure you don't think that else you wouldn't be practicing it. But rather, why you trust what your teacher and his teacher says? Yip Man wasn't known as a fighter and had little experience proving his art to anyone, atleast compared to todays standards. Several of his students did test it out, but again these seem far from serious encounters and most would probably fail miserably in MMA events. I don't mean to sound disrespectful or to be petty, but it does beg the question how you respect your teacher and how you feel about his skills and how you justify learning from him? This isn't so much a slight to him, but a question for you on how you may reconcile this? Perhaps we all can learn.

It's not that I think WCK is so feeble -- I think the way it is "practiced", the traditional training method and the associated mindset, is what makes it so feeble. I think boxing and BJJ are greatmartial arts but if they were trained and practiced like WCK is, they would be just as feeble. Just like traditional japanese jiujitsu is feeble when compared to judo or BJJ (both which evolved from TJJJ). The difference being primarily the training methods, traditional vs. modern (to put labels on them).

With regard to your last series of questions, the most important thing I learned from Robert was "let application be your sifu, let function rule over form." Robert knows that he - and anyone for that matter - can only teach the skills, the tools of WCK (what the traditional training method can do), but that we can only learn how to use them, develop them as fighting skills, by fighting - by sparring with quality opponents (the step most people don't take). So there is nothing to reconcile. My view is that we need to take it one step further: get rid of the ineffective traditional methods and instead train as we now know (and leave the 1800 level technology behind) produces better results by using a 1-to-1-to-1 correspondence between teaching/learning, training, and fighting (as the modern training method does).

[t_niehoff]

Now that's just splitting hairs, man....:rolleyes:

Obviously you do not appreciate the significant difference in CONCEPT.

[AmanuJRY]

Obviously you do not appreciate the significant difference in CONCEPT.

I wasn't presented with differing concepts, I was presented with differing semantics.;)

[t_niehoff]

The MMA one was funnier.

In their Pimp My Gi video one of my BJJ coaches appears in a still with his coach, two UFC competitors, and another Machado black belt.

Definitely equal opportunity.


Yup.



For real laughs, I guess we're going to have to wait for that oft requested but never delivered vid of Terence sparring - sorry, FIGHTING - or perhaps just his reaction of fright, disappointment, and despair to catching his reflection in a mirror.


It's never been a question of what I can do or can't do. I don't hold myself out as an authority (no title, no school, etc.) or as anyone particularly skilled. So I have nothing to prove to anyone.



You look for laughs in anything you'll find them. Look for the inept, depressing and moronic in anything you can find that by the bucketload as well. It's your choice whether you filter for the 10% that's good or spend your time wallowing in the 90% that's sh1t. The latter is much easier, and has Terence has demonstrated, requires only a keyboard, not talent, intelligence, imagination, perseverence or determination.

Boxing, wrestling, BJJ, muay thai, etc. aren't 90% sh1t and 10% "good stuff" -- as you apparently admit WCK is. Perhaps instead of accepting that WCK is 90% sh1t, we could try to do something about it.

[t_niehoff]

I wasn't presented with differing concepts, I was presented with differing semantics.;)

The grandmothers and their hero-worshipping offspring would disagree! Those CONCEPTS are different. Clearly you do not understand the proper time, space, and energy components. Of course these things are secret, handed-down from grandmother to grandmother in secret and only bestowed on a select few indoor students, special people who are able to warm grandmothers anus with their lips (it's called bai si in chinese) and prove their worth (monetary worth). You cannot appreciate teh difference because your grandmother did not teach you the REAL WING CHUN (TM).

[AmanuJRY]

The grandmothers and their hero-worshipping offspring would disagree! Those CONCEPTS are different. Clearly you do not understand the proper time, space, and energy components. Of course these things are secret, handed-down from grandmother to grandmother in secret and only bestowed on a select few indoor students, special people who are able to warm grandmothers anus with their lips (it's called bai si in chinese) and prove their worth (monetary worth). You cannot appreciate teh difference because your grandmother did not teach you the REAL WING CHUN (TM).


Oh........my bad.;)

[Matrix]

It's never been a question of what I can do or can't do. I don't hold myself out as an authority (no title, no school, etc.) or as anyone particularly skilled. So I have nothing to prove to anyone. That must be one of your "principles". By talking smack, you are telling us that you are better than those you criticize. I'm really looking forward to seeing you display those skills some day when your modesty permits it. I expect to be impressed.

Bill

[Ultimatewingchun]

You expect too much, Bill. If there was really anything more than just average fighting skills to be seen in a Terence video - and with an ego like his - we would have been treated to the video long ago.

It's never going to happen. Say hello to Lou Thesz's philosophy below... ;) :D

[k gledhill]

terences description of his wck as nothing more than ' dirty clinching ' speaks volumes. :D

[golden arhat]

hahahaah u guys suck mma rules :cool:



oh wait theres another vid ............ :eek:



oh:(

[anerlich]

I don't hold myself out as an authority (no title, no school, etc.) or as anyone particularly skilled.

I think everyone has come to the conclusion some time ago that T is neither an authority, other than on the production of enormous volumes of annoying, derivative prose, or has any skills worth mentioning.

If he was a good sport, he could make a vid anyway. The forum needs more laughs.

[monji112000]

. . . September is _ing __un sucks month at Bullshido! A well-earned pat on the back to you all. And as a treat, someone made this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7KxuDYfpSQ

which, unfortunately, can't even begin to include all the "best" stuff (there is just too much gold out there, and seems to be growing exponentially). So if you or your group was ignored, don't feel slighted or left out. I'm sure the time will come when you will be recognized.

And let's not forget the debt we owe our grandmasters: without them leading the way, we couldn't have done it. Fortunately they have passed down (transmitted) "the real secrets" (TM) of fighting and training that have gotten us to this point. We've done a great job keeping that tradition alive.

Please, keep up the good work! Keep doing those forms and the chi sao. Preserve those "concepts" and "principles" that have taken us so far.
Very funny stuff, I would have posted in the MMA area becouse of the "type" of content but I didn't have time when the vid first came out.

I love YungChun's post about horse stance like thats really whats wrong with the video.

[Matrix]

You expect too much, Bill. If there was really anything more than just average fighting skills to be seen in a Terence video - and with an ego like his - we would have been treated to the video long ago.Victor,

I don't think you can draw that conclusion from a lack of video evidence. Terence is from Missouri. Isn't that the "Show Me" state? ;)

Bill

[YungChun]

Boxing, wrestling, BJJ, muay thai, etc. aren't 90% sh1t and 10% "good stuff" -- as you apparently admit WCK is.

I would question that based on numbers.. 90% of boxers suck compared to elite pro boxers..

In any case, what constitutes NOT SUCKING...?

You have intimated that folks here who just do the forms and chi sao without sparring suck..

You have intimated that folks here who do the forms and chi sao and spar in/out of class also suck..

So how does one go about not sucking?

What must the level of performance be to not qualify for sucking?

Certainly most of the Tennis one can watch when visiting the local courts would totally SUCK compared to Wimbledon.. Yet they still play...at whatever level they can... Shall we MOCK those people who don't measure up to Tennis Pros or even advanced players, or is that held in reserve for your average WCK players?



we could try to do something about it.


HOW and WHAT in the world are you proposing to "do about it?"

[sihing]

I would question that based on numbers.. 90% of boxers suck compared to elite pro boxers..

In any case, what constitutes NOT SUCKING...?

You have intimated that folks here who just do the forms and chi sao without sparring suck..

You have intimated that folks here who do the forms and chi sao and spar in/out of class also suck..

So how does one go about not sucking?

What must the level of performance be to not qualify for sucking?

Certainly most of the Tennis one can watch when visiting the local courts would totally SUCK compared to Wimbledon.. Yet they still play...at whatever level they can... Shall we MOCK those people who don't measure up to Tennis Pros or is that reserved for your average WCK player?



HOW and WHAT in the world are you proposing to "do about it?"

I think you've hit the nail on the head here Jim:). Is there a standard for comparision or are we comparing ourselves to the cream of the crop unrealistically? Why compare ourselves to professionals when none of us here want to be professional, nor do we have the ability to train in such a way or the ability to even attempt it due to limited natural abilities. IMO, if you come on here and state that your WC is undefeatable then you will have to answer to someone about that. I don't see anyone doing that here. People train in the things they like more so than in what is more effective. Is WC an effective training system, YES, but alot of it is dependent on the individual and what they want out of it, who they learn from, how they train. There are also many other methods that are effective as well. To me it is almost impossible to compare individuals on a forum like this. The only thing you can do is compare methods, and IMO WC is a good method, but the way you train it is important. The traditional way is not the best way to train absolutely for fighting, but as a way of passing along the basics it suffices. After the basics are absorbed you have to test it, explore it and experience it for yourself to make it your own, and not be a carbon copy of the person that passed it along to you. For me, I haven't even had the opportunity to get into a fight for years and years now, so I train strictly to learn the skills of VT and to pass it along to others. I don't make claims of superiority about WC nor about myself and I am not to concerned about who my next opponent will be as there hasn't been any for a long long time now:)

James

[anerlich]

Boxing, wrestling, BJJ, muay thai, etc. aren't 90% sh1t and 10% "good stuff" -- as you apparently admit WCK is.

I was paraphrasing Sturgeon's Law here, "ninety percent of everything is crap". I made no admissions. I was unaware we needed to stick to exact measurements, like "90% of fights end up on the ground". T's statement above misreprepresents my argument, hardly a surprise as he is interested only in his own self-appointed, demented mission rather than the truth.

I am advised that T also implied in one of his posts that Joe Sayah and Rick Spain had made on significant achievements in MA and had no fight records. Rick Spain had 37 pro kickboxing bouts, over 100 amateur bouts, and only retired from fighting because of an serious ankle injury sustained in a car accident. He also won an international KF tournament in HK, cancelled for the following year because too many competitors were hospitalised during the FIGHTING and no more sponsors could be found for the next year. He also had exhibition bouts with Benny Urquidez and Bill Wallace, neither of whom fought MMA, but could not rationally be described as theoreticians by anybody - at least anybody who is not delusional.

I know kickboxing ain't MMA. But it IS fighting.

Can I prove it? Probably. An inquisitor could start with old time martial artists from Melbourne involved in the late 70's early 80's kickboxing scene, perhaps in the Zen Do Kai organisation. John Will and Richard Norton (a winner of a number of high level grappling tournaments as well as a host of other MA achievements) would also be able to set the record straight.

T's own instructor, Robert Chu, has met Rick Spain, and could no doubt illuminate Terence, if not on his fight record, on Rick's skills, which Robert told me in an email were impressive to him.

That would assume T was interested in facts rather than straws and distortions of the truth to support his sorry world view.

But I suggest that it is T, not me, that has the credibility problem here. And he should worry about the host of broken panes in his own glass house before picking up any rocks.

[anerlich]

HOW and WHAT in the world are you proposing to "do about it?"


Making a fool of himself on internet forums, obviously. It's working REAL well, isn't it?

[gabe]

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;793467]Yup.



"It's never been a question of what I can do or can't do. I don't hold myself out as an authority (no title, no school, etc.) or as anyone particularly skilled. So I have nothing to prove to anyone. "


If you don't hold yourself out as an authority, what is the basis of your gazillion posts judging and criticizing others? Video of yourself would provide some basis for them. You've made personal attacks but won't put yourself out there. When you say so and so sucks, people will always ask what YOU can do. Logical, don' t you think?:p

[southernkf]

To play devils advocate:

It seems many of you are not fond of some of the comments made. I myself don't necessarily like the way it is delivered, I do think there is some truth and merit in the content.

I suppose no one here has criticized the skill of someone? To be fair, much in wing chun has been substandard. I am not sure if it is because people are claiming to be uber-wing chunists, but rather that it is an artifact of having people proud of wing chun and willing to share what their doing. It may be mean spirited to criticize it, but it may still be valid.

Just to note as well. We don't necessarily need to be good ourselves to identify things that are not good. Perhaps it is in bad form to criticize others if you yourself suck, but that affect the initial observation.

This is all said without the context of previous conversations that most of you seem to have.

[anerlich]

To play devils advocate:

I think most of us gave him some slack at the beginning. But it quickly became obvious that our tolerance was inappropriate. He's said all this crap several hundred times over, and other people (www.straightblastgym.com as just one example) said it much better than he long before he started. Self appointed prophets who cannot walk their talk get really annoying really quickly.


This is all said without the context of previous conversations that most of you seem to have.

I confidently predict your tolerant attitude toward T, which is not a bad thing in itself, will change before very long. Having it implied or said straight out that your instructors are either morons or charlatans, and that you are a gullible, deluded fool, by someone who has no authority to judge, over and over and over and over and over, tends to get your back up. As it should.

[YungChun]

I confidently predict your tolerant attitude toward T, which is not a bad thing in itself, will change before very long.
Right..

We have all agreed with T on various points and have still been called THEORETICAL MIND BOXERS by T..

It doesn't help to agree with him.. If you agree with him and still agree with ANY common WCK training concepts then you are right back to being called a THEORETICAL MIND BOXER by T.. He DOES WCK according to him, yet is riddled with contempt of any of what constitutes the style in a conventional sense..

His position is loaded with contradictions.. He will spend hours telling you what WCK IS NOT but cannot or will not say what he thinks it is, or show you what he thinks it is... THAT is the problem.. NOTE how he is laying low now..as some of the counter points to his position made on this and another thread are a problem for him to resolve..

[anerlich]

His position is loaded with contradictions.. He will spend hours telling you what WCK IS NOT but cannot or will not say what he thinks it is, or show you what he thinks it is... THAT is the problem..

You're right, Jim.

However, the above description oversimplifies the labyrinthine philosophical contortions (e.g. is Robert Chu, his Sifu, what her refers to, in a rather uncomplimientary tone, as a "grandmother", and if not why not?), infinite regress of self contradiction, abusive (including self-abusive, in both senses of the word)nature, and sheer absurdity of it.

To call it a "position" is inaccurate, it's like trying to grasp water, or more accurately, an unholy brew of venom and bile ...

[Ultimatewingchun]

This quote by Anerlich is by far the best description/analysis to date of the FOOLS ARROGANCE that is a Terence post - and the Terence attitude. It should become the new mantra around here, imo...as to how to respond to this moron.

That is - if you haven't already wised up to the benefits of the IGNORE button regarding the wing chun forum troll hypocrite par excellance.

"Self appointed prophets who cannot walk their talk get really annoying really quickly...I predict your tolerant attitude toward T, which is not a bad thing in itself, will change before very long. Having it implied or said straight out that your instructors are either morons or charlatans, and that you are a gullible, deluded fool, by someone who has no authority to judge, over and over and over and over and over, tends to get your back up. As it should."


***AMEN, Anerlich. Amen.

[t_niehoff]

If you don't hold yourself out as an authority, what is the basis of your gazillion posts judging and criticizing others? Video of yourself would provide some basis for them. You've made personal attacks but won't put yourself out there. When you say so and so sucks, people will always ask what YOU can do. Logical, don' t you think?:p

No, it's not logical.

A person doesn't even need to be a WCK practitioner to see the nonsense, the bullshido, in WCK. All it takes is for someone to be clear-thinking and clear-seeing. But WCK, like all the TMAs, programs or brainwashes you. People in TMAs, includng WCK, believe things not because there is evidence -- that they've seen for themselves what they believe -- but because they are told things, things they want to believe. And these things go against what is known to be true.

For example, there is a certain specific process that leads to development in open skills. Sport people and scientific researchers have recognized this for over 100 years. Fighting, regardless of the method, is an open skill. People who use that process, boxers, judoka, MT, wreslters, BJJ, etc., develop very high levels of fighitng skills. Anyone who doesn't use that process - regardless of what else they do -- can't develop good skills. The TMAs, inlcuding WCK, doesn't use that process. Neither does tai ji. Or aikido. Yet people in the TMAs continue to believe otherwise, even though they can't provide any evidence to support their claims.

It's simple if you are not brainwashed --

[sanjuro_ronin]

For example, there is a certain specific process that leads to development in open skills. Sport people and scientific researchers have recognized this for over 100 years. Fighting, regardless of the method, is an open skill. People who use that process, boxers, judoka, MT, wreslters, BJJ, etc., develop very high levels of fighitng skills. Anyone who doesn't use that process - regardless of what else they do -- can't develop good skills. The TMAs, inlcuding WCK, doesn't use that process. Neither does tai ji. Or aikido. Yet people in the TMAs continue to believe otherwise, even though they can't provide any evidence to support their claims.


I think we need to change the term TMA to ModernTMA, because the systems you mentioned are all TMA, they happen to be sport versions, but TMA nevertheless.

The Issue is NON-COMBATIVE Modern TMA, I say Modern because I don't know of ANY "old school" TMA that did not advocate fighting as a testing medium.

[YungChun]

For example, there is a certain specific process that leads to development in open skills. Sport people and scientific researchers have recognized this for over 100 years. Fighting, regardless of the method, is an open skill. People who use that process, boxers, judoka, MT, wreslters, BJJ, etc., develop very high levels of fighitng skills. Anyone who doesn't use that process - regardless of what else they do -- can't develop good skills. The TMAs, inlcuding WCK, doesn't use that process. Neither does tai ji. Or aikido. Yet people in the TMAs continue to believe otherwise, even though they can't provide any evidence to support their claims.


This is nonsense..

Everyone <the vast majority> have already agreed with this singular point.. It's the other 7000 sub-points and contradictions--as have been pointed out, that constitute the BS factor..

And it doesn't matter. People can/do just IGNORE him...

But I have no problem saying I have learned from Terence... I think there is a lot of great points in his comments about the "state of the art". <take a look at this months kung-fu magazine>..

Again, the problem is his lack of tact, setting standards for others, which he does not hold himself to, and quickness to dismiss anyone or any idea that is even slightly outside of his "box".

In gungfu and in life one must be ready to take that which is good and simply leave behind that which is not.

[t_niehoff]

HOW and WHAT in the world are you proposing to "do about it?"

I have laid this all out before, and tried explaining it. You can't understand it because you are looking at it from a traditional mindset, brainwashed perspective. But to try again --

To begin with, we need to see what is at the root of it. And IMO it is rooted in how we look at things. Nothing can change until we get rid of the traditional mindset and stop pursuing false images (these two reinforce each other). And that's because our views inform our behavior. Those two things prevent us from looking at what we are doing from the standpoint of evidence and reason. They brainwash us. And our "training" reinforces that brainwashing.

The traditional mindset is a set of blinders that prevent us from seeing things as they really are. It's characterized by being backward looking, by being theory-based, by being authority-centered, by placing the tradition ahead of the individual, and by a drive to preserve the tradition for its own sake. That view of martial arts points you in the wrong direction, and the further along that road you go, the more lost you get. Someone holding that view can never get really good, as their mindset will prevent them from doing the things necessary to get good.

The false images include a false image of what fighting is or is really like (and instead projecting what you want it to be), a false image as to what a "master"or "sifu" is or looks like, etc. And it typically involves role-playing. And again, someone holding these images, and pursuing these images, can never get good as their mindset will prevent them from doing those things they need to do to get good.

When we discard that way of looking at things, you'll begin to see through the stories, the legends, the nonsense. You'll not believe what you are told unless and until you see it *proved* -- in fighting -- for yourself. You will also come to see that there is an open skill developmental process (OSDP) that human beings must use to develop significant levels of open skill. You'll recognize that WCK -- with its forms, drills, etc. -- isn't using that process. We're just - to borrow the title fo the song from the bullshido clip -- doing "the magic dance". So if you are intereseted in developing genuine fighting skill, you will begin to use that open skill develop process. And the more you use that process, the more clearly you will see the nonsense in TMAs.

You chide me for not giving answers. But you see, your looking for an answer is part of your being locked into that traditional mindset. Answers come from authorities, from theory, from systems, etc. From my perspective, no one can give you the answers. You can only find your answers for yourself by going through the process (OSDP).

In other words, if you want to develop good fighting skills, you need to see yourself as a fighter, as an athlete, and train like a fighter does. You can look around you and see how genuine fighters really train. There's no secret to it. Boxers, wrestlers, BJJ people, MT people, MMAists, etc. all use that OSDP, modified to their specific method. Forms, unrealistic drills, etc. are mainly a waste of time.

[t_niehoff]

This is nonsense..

Everyone <the vast majority> have already agreed with this singular point.. It's the other 7000 sub-points and contradictions--as have been pointed out, that constitute the BS factor..

And it doesn't matter. People can/do just IGNORE him...

But I have no problem saying I have learned from Terence... I think there is a lot of great points in his comments about the "state of the art". <take a look at this months kung-fu magazine>..

Again, the problem is his lack of tact, setting standards for others, which he does not hold himself to, and quickness to dismiss anyone or any idea that is even slightly outside of his "box".

In gungfu and in life one must be ready to take that which is good and simply leave behind that which is not.

No, they haven't agreed. If they did agree, they wouldn't be doing the nonsense or supporting the nonsense. If you agreed, you'd be saying that forms are silly. You'd be saying that chi sao is unrealistic and can never develop fighting skill. You'd be saying the grandmasters couldn't have much skill because they never fought/trained with anyone with significant skills. WE ARE THE STATE OF THE ART.

[YungChun]

I love the “you won’t get it” disclaimer.

See the good part of your message is overshadowed by your insults.. When the messenger is talking smack, no one cares how good the message is. It’s this puerile side of you that makes you an “undesirable” and would likely get you a black eye in the street if used with the wrong person.. No doubt you conduct yourself differently online than you do in person..

The “traditional mindset” is a blanket abstraction that you have created in your head, like a myth, like your inner demon. Yes, somewhere in the world there is that exact model of martial failure, but rarely so in it’s entirety.. More often there are bits and parts of this "mindset" at work, shades of gray. Not everyone is the complete fool that you take them for..

But you are too extreme.. Not ALL classical training is bad.. Not all classical training theory is bad..

Not all theory is limited to classical arts..

Not all classical arts are purely classical, in fact now more than ever they are not..

Nevertheless, this does not address the question you quoted: How do you plan to "do something" about the state of the art..?

That's what "maybe we can do something about it" implied.. The point is you are NOT going to do anything about it.

IT will take its course...as will you as will I..

[t_niehoff]

I was paraphrasing Sturgeon's Law here, "ninety percent of everything is crap". I made no admissions. I was unaware we needed to stick to exact measurements, like "90% of fights end up on the ground". T's statement above misreprepresents my argument, hardly a surprise as he is interested only in his own self-appointed, demented mission rather than the truth.


So you say in your post "90% is crap" and when I quote you saying it, then you come back and say you didn't really mean it. OK. Sorry that I couldn't read your mind and instead read your words.



I am advised that T also implied in one of his posts that Joe Sayah and Rick Spain had made on significant achievements in MA and had no fight records. Rick Spain had 37 pro kickboxing bouts, over 100 amateur bouts, and only retired from fighting because of an serious ankle injury sustained in a car accident. He also won an international KF tournament in HK, cancelled for the following year because too many competitors were hospitalised during the FIGHTING and no more sponsors could be found for the next year. He also had exhibition bouts with Benny Urquidez and Bill Wallace, neither of whom fought MMA, but could not rationally be described as theoreticians by anybody - at least anybody who is not delusional.

I know kickboxing ain't MMA. But it IS fighting.


How silly is it to put people on your ignore list but then respond to them -- after being advised from a third person what they said! Are you going to ignore me or not?

I grant you that Spain is a good kickboxer. I could see that on his youtube clip.



Can I prove it? Probably. An inquisitor could start with old time martial artists from Melbourne involved in the late 70's early 80's kickboxing scene, perhaps in the Zen Do Kai organisation. John Will and Richard Norton (a winner of a number of high level grappling tournaments as well as a host of other MA achievements) would also be able to set the record straight.

T's own instructor, Robert Chu, has met Rick Spain, and could no doubt illuminate Terence, if not on his fight record, on Rick's skills, which Robert told me in an email were impressive to him.


Why are you so attached to Spain kickboxing skills? Or his kickboxing record? What does it matter? You brought up how Sayah and Spain were not accepted into the UFC, and I offered an explanation why: neither provided evidence of being UFC-worthy. Like I said with Milton, you earn your shot there -- by winning in lots of lesser NHB venues. Neither had done that. You don't see pure muay thai fighters in the UFC, just as you don't see pure kickboxers. And as you yourself say (here I go again, listening to your words), Spain's fights were all pure kickkboxing events.

[YungChun]

If you agreed, you'd be saying that forms are silly. You'd be saying that chi sao is unrealistic and can never develop fighting skill.

Wing Chun is a system of training and fighting concepts.. Where concepts amount to a mental model which acts as a common thread that the brain can use to aid in applying and training the tactics of the system..

Without that training what is Wing Chun?

Without that training how is Wing Chun trained?

Tell us how Wing Chun is trained without using WCK material forms/drills?

Prove that your method of training Wing Chun is better by posting a clip of anyone who has not done any of the classical training, fighting and beating quality people with WCK; Otherwise I have no reason to believe you..

I gather, you don't believe in perfection work? If not then I think you are dead wrong and a little silly... :p

[t_niehoff]

I love the “you won’t get it” disclaimer.


I put that in becasue you keep saying "you get it" but you don't!



See the good part of your message is overshadowed by your insults.. When the messenger is talking smack, no one cares how good the message it It’s this puerile side of you that makes you an “undesirable” and would likely get you a black eye in the street if used with the wrong person.. No doubt you conduct yourself differently online than you do in person..


I am as direct in person as I am online. :) I'm sorry you don't like my "tone".



The “traditional mindset” is a blanket abstraction that you have created in your head, like a myth, like your inner demon. Yes, somewhere in the world there is that exact model of martial failure, but rarely so in it’s entirety.. More often there are bits and parts of this "mindset" at work, shades of gray. Not everyone is the complete fool that you take them for..


No, the traditional mindset exists, and once you recognize it, you can see itsmanifestation everywhere in the TMAs. In fact, that's the single, detrerminative characteristic of all the TMAs: they all share that worldview. That's why they all suck.



But you are too extreme.. Not ALL classical training is bad.. Not all classical training theory is bad..


Again, you miss the point. There is a process that develops higher levels of open skill activities. If you are using that process, you can develop significant levels of skill. If not, you won't. The classical training doesn't use that process. It is pointless to look at components of training without looking at it from the perspective of that process.



Not all theory is limited to classical arts..


For me, if something is proved via genuine experience, it is no longer "theory". A fighter talking about "theory" is talking about something very different from the nonfighter. What the fighter is talking about is a pattern or consistency they have seen from fighting.



Not all classical arts are purely classical, in fact now more than ever they are not..


Yes, some TMAs are evolving. What holds them back from evolving are the traditional mindset and the pursuing of false images.



Nevertheless, this does not address the question you quoted: How do you plan to "do something" about the state of the art..?

That's what "maybe we can do something about it" implied.. The point is you are NOT going to do anything about it.

IT will take its course...as will you as will I..

Each of us can only be responsible for ourselves, and our own development. We can't do anything about others. They are responsible for themselves. Personally, I don't think anything much can be done to get people out of the grip of the traditional mindset or stop them from chasing false images -- more often than not, these are the very things that attract them to the TMAs. But, on the other hand, I think that when we let objectionable views go past us unchallenged, we are complicit in them. Sort of like racism -- if we don't stand up and challenge racist views when we hear them, we are part of the problem. I may not be able to do something about racism either, but when I hear it, I step on it like a ****roach. Similarly, when I hear nonsense about WCK, I feel obligated to say something. And who knows? Maybe what I say will get someone thinking.

[YungChun]

For me, if something is proved via genuine experience, it is no longer "theory". A fighter talking about "theory" is talking about something very different from the nonfighter. What the fighter is talking about is a pattern or consistency they have seen from fighting.
No one cares what it means "to you"...

Many of us have used "classical" WCK training theory, training concepts, drills, etc, whatever that means to you, in fighting/sparring/self defense and so it too falls under experience..

When I fight I do not try to 'do a theory' I just fight.. What I do however is a product of training AND experience.

Prove that your method of training Wing Chun is better by posting a clip of anyone who has not done any of the classical training, fighting and beating quality people with WCK; Otherwise I have no reason to believe you..

[t_niehoff]

Wing Chun is a system of training and fighting concepts.. Where concepts amount to a mental model which acts as a common thread that the brain can use to aid in applying and training the tactics of the system..

Without that training what is Wing Chun?

Without that training how is Wing Chun trained?

Tell us how Wing Chun is trained without using WCK material forms/drills?

Prove that your method of training Wing Chun is better by posting a clip of anyone who has not done any of the classical training, fighting and beating quality people with WCK; Otherwise I have no reason to believe you..

I gather, you don't believe in perfection work? If not then I think you are dead wrong and a little silly... :p

How is boxing or wrestling or judo or muay thai or BJJ trained without forms? They seem to do OK. Forms are silly if you grasp the open skill development process -- you can't develop open skills, like fighting or tennis or basketball from doing forms. And even as a learning platform, forms are not really useful.

Just use a sparring platform to teach and train -- that's what all the functional martial arts do. Teach the fundamental skills and tools of the fighting method, show how to play the game, and then play the game. Simple.

You don't have to believe *me*. These things don't rest on my shoulders. Just look at what all good fighters are doing -- they're using this same process. As do all other good open skill athletes.

[YungChun]

Just look at what all good fighters are doing -- they're using this same process. As do all other good open skill athletes.

Many of them also do perfection work..

WCK has perfection work too and it plays an important role in 'fine tuning' different parts of the system in a progressive resistance, variable stress format—ChiSao.

A process that can easily be found—paralleled—in other arts like BJJ where folks isolate and perfect in much the same way if not the same drill...

Show me 1 single example of ANY 'Wing Chun guy' kicking ass who has no classical training..

[gabe]

No, it's not logical.

A person doesn't even need to be a WCK practitioner to see the nonsense, the bullshido, in WCK. All it takes is for someone to be clear-thinking and clear-seeing. But WCK, like all the TMAs, programs or brainwashes you. People in TMAs, includng WCK, believe things not because there is evidence -- that they've seen for themselves what they believe -- but because they are told things, things they want to believe. And these things go against what is known to be true.

For example, there is a certain specific process that leads to development in open skills. Sport people and scientific researchers have recognized this for over 100 years. Fighting, regardless of the method, is an open skill. People who use that process, boxers, judoka, MT, wreslters, BJJ, etc., develop very high levels of fighitng skills. Anyone who doesn't use that process - regardless of what else they do -- can't develop good skills. The TMAs, inlcuding WCK, doesn't use that process. Neither does tai ji. Or aikido. Yet people in the TMAs continue to believe otherwise, even though they can't provide any evidence to support their claims.

It's simple if you are not brainwashed --

Uh, actually, it's very logical. When a person makes personal attacks, we look at the person making them. When a person judges, we look at that person's qualifications to judge...or criticize.

The rest of your post has no relevance to mine and why bother addressing the same old strawman argument. But I'll address it. In the real world, you had an opportunity to spar with real people from tma. Where would you stand if you were housed by one of them, who didn't use your approved process? You accuse others of not wanting to spar to protect their livelihoods. Why didn't you? To protect your internet personna?

In the real world, I have had my a$$ handed to me by people I'd call MMAists AND people I'd call TMAists. Great lessons learned. You really need to step outside of your theoretical world and join the real world, where things aren't as black and white as you'd like to paint them. But stay safe with your little group of specifically picked sparring partners. Much safer for the ego when you know what to expect.:cool:

[t_niehoff]

Uh, actually, it's very logical. When a person makes personal attacks, we look at the person making them. When a person judges, we look at that person's qualifications to judge...or criticize.


I've not attacked anyone personally on this forum. I am challenging views. Views.

And I am using evidence and reason to support my views and challenge others. "Qualifications" aren't necessary. This is part of the traditional mindset -- who are *you* (as though you have to be worthy) to challenge the view? You don't need to be anyone or to be "qualified" to point out nonsense. If someone said they could levitate do I need to be a physicist to point out that's utter nonsense?



The rest of your post has no relevance to mine and why bother addressing the same old strawman argument. But I'll address it. In the real world, you had an opportunity to spar with real people from tma. Where would you stand if you were housed by one of them, who didn't use your approved process? You accuse others of not wanting to spar to protect their livelihoods. Why didn't you? To protect your internet personna?


Internet persona? Are you serious? LOL!

I very deliberately and intentionally don't hold myself out as an authority. I haven't given myself a title, I don't take money to teach people, etc. As I said, I am a student of the game. But if someone does hold themselves out as an authority, they should be able to back up what they say. If you teach what you can't do, then you are a charlatan.



In the real world, I have had my a$$ handed to me by people I'd call MMAists AND people I'd call TMAists. Great lessons learned. You really need to step outside of your theoretical world and join the real world, where things aren't as black and white as you'd like to paint them. But stay safe with your little group of specifically picked sparring partners. Much safer for the ego when you know what to expect.:cool:

The fact that some TMAist got their ass handed to them by other TMAists is not surprising -- one poor fighter defeats another poor fighter. Where are the TMAists that can defeat decent fighters? They seem to exist only in stories. That is the real world. You can wake up and smell the coffee or hit the snooze and continue to slumber. If you wake up, you may begin to ask yourself why there aren't any TMAists who haven't shifted to the more modern open skill developmental process that have ever demonstrated good levels of fighting skills.

[YungChun]

why there aren't any TMAists who haven't shifted to the more modern open skill developmental process that have ever demonstrated good levels of fighting skills.
Show us the ones who have.. Show us the ones who have discarded the forms, the drills, the chi sao who are kicking ass on MMA.

Then show me the results of same when the WCK man has no classical base... You can't because you, they and I all do...

"We" agree that you must spar/fight to gain a high level of skill.. "We" agree, the better the people you fight the better you will get... "We" do not agree you must trash the rest of the training to do former...

If you had sparred with TMA X at the Cleveland "meet" and you had been beaten how would you rationalize that?

[t_niehoff]

Many of them also do perfection work..

WCK has perfection work too and it plays an important role in 'fine tuning' different parts of the system in a progressive resistance, variable stress format—ChiSao.

A process that can easily be found—paralleled—in other arts like BJJ where folks isolate and perfect in much the same way if not the same drill...


Of course all open skill athletes work on bettering their skills. Perfection work? You can't get "perfection", or even close to it, from a form or unrealistic drill -- since what needs to be "perfect" are dynamic fighting skills. You get better skilled at catching and throwing a ball by practicing catching and throwing a ball, not by doing forms or unrealistic drills that represent that.



Show me 1 single example of ANY 'Wing Chun guy' kicking ass who has no classical training..


Of course they have all done the classical training; we've all had to go through it -- that doesn't prove the classical training is what gave them the skills. Show me one who has only done the classical training and *not* the open skill development process, i.e., trained like all modern fighters train, that has proved to have good fighting skills (by holding their own against good fighters).

We can look at all manner of fighting methods and we see the same things -- the functional martial arts eschew forms and unrealistic drills consistently produce good results, whereas the nonfunctional martial arts, the TMAS, which consist for the most part of forms and unrealistic drills, don't.

[YungChun]

Of course all open skill athletes work on bettering their skills. Perfection work? You can't get "perfection", or even close to it, from a form or unrealistic drill

Isolating a WCK technique in ChiSao and working it over and over at progressive resistance is no different that a BJJ man working a particular technique with another BJJ man in a cooperative manner, over and over and over again with the proper, energy and positional conditions with variable resistance.. Neither is fighting.. Both are drilling, both are perfection work that lead to fighting/sparring.. Why do they isolate and repeat? The same reason we do.. If you can't see that then you are as blind as a bat.

If you think that there is a better way to isolate and refine WCK inside work then prove it or shut up...

[sanjuro_ronin]

The fact that some TMAist got their ass handed to them by other TMAists is not surprising -- one poor fighter defeats another poor fighter. Where are the TMAists that can defeat decent fighters? They seem to exist only in stories.


What is YOUR definition of a Traditional Martial Artist ?
It seems you are confusing people who train to fight and those that "just train" and lumping them into the same category because they may train the "same" system.

Remember Judo and Wrestling are TMA, as it kyokushin, for example.

[t_niehoff]

Show us the ones who have.. Show us the ones who have discarded the forms, the drills, the chi sao who are kicking ass on MMA.

Then show me the results of same when the WCK man has no classical base... You can't because you, they and I all do...


They all have that classical base because that is all any of us have been taught. The good ones, the ones with good skills, have gone beyond that. The unfortunate thing is that most continue to fob off that stuff because that is what is "ex[pected" when people to go learn WCK.

Why do you need a form to chi sao to teach you how to punch? Or how to do anything?



"We" agree that you must spar/fight to gain a high level of skill.. "We" agree, the better the people you fight the better you will get... "We" do not agree you must trash the rest of the training to do former...


Hack away the unessentials. If you really aprreciate what an open skill is -- you will appreciate how forms are useless in learning or developing skills. Why use forms to teach tennis or boxing or WCK? You don't need them. Think skills. Skills. Like thrwoing a ball. There is no one "correct or ideal form" as it is a dynamic action that will be adjusted everytime you do it.

Unrealistic drills can have their place, for example in learning a movement or skill. But after that, they become liabilities, not assets. Practicing unrealistic skills your whole life will not make them realistic skills.



If you had sparred with TMA X at the Cleveland "meet" and you had been beaten how would you rationalize that?

Look at it a different way -- show me the guys who only do the classical training that can do what they train to do in fighting good people (use their WCK tools as they train to do them). And btw, that was my problem with Cleveland: I wanted to invite good people, good nonWCK fighters. Lots of big guys can fight. But can they make their training work -- fight as they train to do? In other words, do what they do in training in fighting. It's not just a matter of winning. It's also how they win. So if someone does WCK and then kickboxes in their sparring, where is the WCK training? Hell, why do they need WCK to kickbox (however good kickboxers they might be)?

[YungChun]

What is YOUR definition of a Traditional Martial Artist?

He at least asserts that any and all martial artists that train forms and/or do classical drills automatically suck and can't fight.. :rolleyes::eek::confused::D

[YungChun]

Look at it a different way -- show me the guys who only do the classical training that can do what they train to do in fighting

I don't know anyone who trains that way... Who the fuk are you talking about and why should I care?

I started sparring before I started WCK.. I used WCK as a tool to help stop getting my azz kicked in..


And btw, that was my problem with Cleveland: I wanted to invite good people, good nonWCK fighters. Lots of big guys can fight. But can they make their training work -- fight as they train to do? In other words, do what they do in training in fighting. It's not just a matter of winning. It's also how they win. So if someone does WCK and then kickboxes in their sparring, where is the WCK training? Hell, why do they need WCK to kickbox (however good kickboxers they might be)?
What a tangled web of contradictions and self deception.

If you really buy this crap then you need help...

You wanted to invite good non WCK because you didn't want to spar with WCK folks who were doing WCK the wrong way.. WAA

How about this: You came up with an <really odd> excuse not to come so you wouldn't get your ass handed to you by a TMA...

[t_niehoff]

Isolating a WCK technique in ChiSao and working it over and over at progressive resistance is no different that a BJJ man working a particular technique with another BJJ man in a cooperative manner, over and over and over again with the proper, energy and positional conditions with variable resistance.. Neither is fighting.. Both are drilling, both are perfection work that lead to fighting/sparring.. Why do they isolate and repeat? The same reason we do.. If you can't see that then you are as blind as a bat.

If you think that there is a better way to isolate and refine WCK inside work then prove it or shut up...

In BJJ, we do "dead" drilling to develop better coordination, to refine movement, etc. But, even so, those movements are being practiced as they will be done in fighitng -- so you get that 1-to-1-to-1 correspondence. And the "dead" drilling is a very, very small part of the training (less than 10%). The core of the training is live rolling -- sparring.

In WCK, the movements in chi sao do not correspond to how they will be done in fighting. If you did those movement in fighting like you did in chi sao, you'd get killed. They "work" in chi sao only because both sides are using preprogrammed chi sao responses. So when you practice chi sao, you are not "perfecting" anything. The proof of this is simple: does your fighting look just like your chi sao? If not, then you are not practicing your movements as they will be done in fighting. You are practicing one way and fighting another. This is poor training. You are actually reinforcing unproductive movement habits.

[t_niehoff]

I don't know anyone who trains that way... Who the fuk are you talking about and why should I care?

I started sparring before I started WCK.. I used WCK as a tool to help stop getting my azz kicked in..

What a tangled web of contradictions and self deception.

If you really buy this crap then you need help...

You wanted to invite good non WCK because you didn't want to spar with WCK folks who were doing WCK the wrong way.. WAA

How about this: You came up with an <really odd> excuse not to come so you wouldn't get your ass handed to you by a TMA...

No, I didn't want to take the time to travel to Cleveland to waste my time.

[t_niehoff]

What is YOUR definition of a Traditional Martial Artist ?
It seems you are confusing people who train to fight and those that "just train" and lumping them into the same category because they may train the "same" system.

Remember Judo and Wrestling are TMA, as it kyokushin, for example.

I bet if you asked judoka and wrestlers if they were TMAists, I think they would say not. ;)

All fighting methods are traditions. But that doesn't make them TMAs. TMAs are those that hold on to the traditional training methodology and traditional mindset (they go hand in hand). Judo and wrestling both use the open skill development process and reject the traditional mindset.

In FMAs, for example, the Dog Brothers and Raymond Floro, both have taken escrima out of the traditional martial art realm.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I bet if you asked judoka and wrestlers if they were TMAists, I think they would say not. ;)

All fighting methods are traditions. But that doesn't make them TMAs. TMAs are those that hold on to the traditional training methodology and traditional mindset (they go hand in hand). Judo and wrestling both use the open skill development process and reject the traditional mindset.

In FMAs, for example, the Dog Brothers and Raymond Floro, both have taken escrima out of the traditional martial art realm.

I am a shodan Judoka...guess what I would say and every other judoka I know.
You do realize that the 'traditional mindset" of a TMA is combat effectiveness above everything else right?

I really think you are mistaking non-combative TMA with the combative ones and just lumping them together.

As for the Dog Brothers taking escrima OUT of the TMA realm, how did they do that pray tell ?
Considering that there were full contact escrimadores before they were around.

[YungChun]

The proof of this is simple: does your fighting look just like your chi sao?
Does the dead BJJ drilling look like real fighting, when real fighting is you grappling with a boxer, street fighter, MT man? Nope...

Does the "dead" drill look same when fighting another BJJ man...? Closer.. Does the *interaction* in ChiSao look like it will when fighting a boxer, street fighter, MT man? Nope.. Does it look more like two Wing Chun guys fighting? Yup...

Your logic is flawed.. A WCK man is trying to hold centerline <or at least most are>.. Other fighters are not.. We train to hold centerline.. Others do not.. Naturally the interaction will be different but the WCK techniques are the same—a punch, a jam, a pin, etc...

The response in ChiSao is to energy and position with Wing Chun techniques and Wing Chun responses.. A fight between a boxer and a WCK man will not look like a fight between a WCK man vs a WCK man... A BJJ fighter vs a Boxer will not look like a fight between a BJJ man vs. another BJJ man..

However, there are only so many kinds of position and energy.. The ChiSao partner is more sensitive to these positions as a BJJ man is with the positions and energy they use. Good BJJ players are technically ahead of those who do not specialize in that range, just as good WCK players are technically ahead of controlling the center and using WCK techniques at that range... The techniques used, pak da, or whatever are the same techniques in Chi Sao as they would be used with contact against anyone--just as an arm bar is essentially the same technique in BJJ despite what the overall interaction looks like during a "dead" drill, which will also not look like fighting.

[YungChun]

No, I didn't want to take the time to travel to Cleveland to waste my time.
Why not just hold the next meet at T's crib.. :cool:

I'm sure he wouldn't mind.. :rolleyes:

[gabe]

I've not attacked anyone personally on this forum. I am challenging views. Views.



Internet persona? Are you serious? LOL!

I very deliberately and intentionally don't hold myself out as an authority. I haven't given myself a title, I don't take money to teach people, etc. As I said, I am a student of the game. But if someone does hold themselves out as an authority, they should be able to back up what they say. If you teach what you can't do, then you are a charlatan.



s.

"Call him out? Are you serious? He wouldn't fight a little girl. None of the grandmasters would. Because then we'd see what little in the way of skills they really have and their livlihood would go down the drain."

Here you are attacking a view, or are you attacking Chen Xiao Wang? Not just his skills but his character.

"The fact that some TMAist got their ass handed to them by other TMAists is not surprising -- one poor fighter defeats another poor fighter. Where are the TMAists that can defeat decent fighters? "

And here you are attacking ME, not a view. And you've lumped me into your strawman TMAist without knowing a thing about me, or the people I spar. You don't even know my views, except as they pertain to you.

What a moron. You are preaching a process which you have provided no evidence that you have walked. And refuse to provide such evidence. You routinely call into question other people's qualifications when you have none to speak of. Who has Terrence fought of quality? Where is the video?
LOL:D

Is Alan Orr a quality fighter? Does he do chi sao? Does he compete? Should we listen to him or to you? Whose opinion is worth more? Do you lecture or preach to him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2bhkTFjWKo

Here is the evidence of a guy that does chi sao and fights and wins. What does that say about Terrence's expositions on chi sao?

Wait a minute, Terrence who? The non-authority? LOL

[osprey3883]

Terrence,
Since you love to address the theoretical, as well as being a lawyer, I wanted to get your take on a theoritical situation.
Let's say someone goes on the internet and runs their mouth about a group of people and their inability to fight, and someone shows up to call him on it. As people interested in the figting arts, lets assume a fight ensues.
What would be the theoretical legal ramifications?

Take care,
Matt :)

[osprey3883]

Hello,
IMO one of the issues we all have with Mr T is that although he has a history in the TMA, he likes to address all the TMA based on his experience in his art(s).
From what I can tell based on his posts, his TMA background is WC under his Sifu Robert Chu.
In my experience in multiple schools, anything we learned in a form was then applied to fighting. Typically we learned it as a part of the form, then broke out the specifics in a partnering set, then learned to apply it "on the fly" in a sparring type environment.
Although I understand Mr T's POV, and I agree that much of what is being taught today commercially is more geared toward fun than fighting, I think attacking the TMA in general is bad form.
Matt

[k gledhill]

In BJJ, we do "dead" drilling to develop better coordination, to refine movement, etc. But, even so, those movements are being practiced as they will be done in fighitng -- so you get that 1-to-1-to-1 correspondence. And the "dead" drilling is a very, very small part of the training (less than 10%). The core of the training is live rolling -- sparring.

In WCK, the movements in chi sao do not correspond to how they will be done in fighting. If you did those movement in fighting like you did in chi sao, you'd get killed. They "work" in chi sao only because both sides are using preprogrammed chi sao responses. So when you practice chi sao, you are not "perfecting" anything. The proof of this is simple: does your fighting look just like your chi sao? If not, then you are not practicing your movements as they will be done in fighting. You are practicing one way and fighting another. This is poor training. You are actually reinforcing unproductive movement habits.

Only if you dont understand chi-sao, you dont understand all ways so you base it on what you know .....there are other ways of thinking , walk on...loyalty to ones guide may take you only to a view they have reached, walk on......
you may see something you havent seen before.

[YungChun]

Only if you dont understand chi-sao
You can say that again..


And the "dead" drilling is a very, very small part of the training (less than 10&#37;).
And dead drilling is also a small part of ChiSao..

Free ChiSao training is an agreement in "range training" *range specialization* much like two ground grapplers would "agree" to keep the "sparring" in "ground range only" to focus on that range, or two western boxers who agree to keep the "sparring" to "punching range only".. This is a limited sparring forum that is ALIVE training FOR SPECIFIC RANGE SPECIALIZATION..

And it's when the training deviates from realistic application, eg, hand chasing, no forward energy, no footwork, no power, etc.. That it's relationship to real fighting/sparring does not relate. A WCK technique is a WCK technique... A Jab is a Jab, a choke is a choke.. There is no special "fake" way to execute ANY WCK technique in ChiSao that differs from actual fighting application. In fact, the further away the two are the less relevant is the play..

What differs in fighting is what in your WCK toolbox that gets used and how often. When you fight a non WCK person the expression--the tools used and how often, will differ greatly, when fighting someone NOT or rarely holding centerline. But the core, <the water hose> is the constant.. How you issue force <which tools/when> will vary greatly based on the opponent and experiencing that in real fighting/sparring is an essential for any serious student..

As I was taught <see sifu says> after one was able to truly master all WCK tools in ChiSao this drill, as with all the other drills in the system, were to be DROPPED.. As a rule the way we were taught, all the earlier drills were DROPPED one by one as you move past it.. However, I have never met anyone who felt they mastered every tool and tactic in the system sufficient to DROP ChiSao from their training.. IMO most of us can benefit from what is ChiSao, if trained correctly, because it covers, in a dynamic and alive manner, so many important WCK elements within.

Oh and about the forms..

They put me to sleep and bore me to death.. But I do think they help re-enforce good mechanics.. That is IF you are using WCK mechanics.. :P

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
"And btw, that was my problem with Cleveland: I wanted to invite good people, good nonWCK fighters. Lots of big guys can fight. But can they make their training work -- fight as they train to do? In other words, do what they do in training in fighting. It's not just a matter of winning. It's also how they win. So if someone does WCK and then kickboxes in their sparring, where is the WCK training? Hell, why do they need WCK to kickbox (however good kickboxers they might be)?"


***AGAIN, another load of total crap. A complete falsehood by the guy who is quickly becoming the laughing stock of the entire wing chun forum. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER...did Terence (or anyone else) make any big deal about the fact that it was going to be a wing chun only SPARRING get together. (The only exception to who was welcomed to come when he expressed an interest - and he did come - was Derek Rozanski from the Weng Chun side of the world, a close cousin to wing chun).

Terence didn't show up because he was AFRAID to show up - as evidenced by the fact that the same guy who - like now - was on here posting everyday not only didn't show up in Cleveland after saying right up to the last minute that he'd be there - BUT HE ALSO DISAPPEARED FROM THIS FORUM FOR THE FOLLOWING 8 MONTHS OR SO!!! :cool: :cool: :cool: :confused: :eek:

Clearly laying low so that he might be able to dodge the "Where were you, big talker?" bullets that he knew would be coming his way if he posted immediately after the event.

What an arrogant wuss!

[YungChun]

I wanted to invite good people, good nonWCK fighters

His body guards... LMAO>>!

[southernkf]

I see the use of TMA and MMA. I think today these words carry a connotation. However I think we are mixing up lots of stuff. TMA doesn't mean much. Each art that we consider TMA was at one point a MMA art. Hung Gar added what worked from various styles to a core base. Choy Li Fut has different histories, but is based on different arts the person learned over the years. The legendary Ng Mui is said to be the creator of several styles, so considering she was versed in several arts/theories we can think of wing chun as some sort of synthesis of those arts.

Any good TMA art is based on real fighters. Most arts can trace their style back to a fighter. Without being exhaustive, Lam Sai Wing and Wong Fei Hung were both notible fighters. Although it may be more difficult to find the seriousness of the fights WFH was involved with, there is no doubt to atleast one of Lam Sai Wing's fights. Ku Yu Cheung of Bak Sui Lam was also very noted as was Huo Yuanjia of Ching Wu. Choy Li Fut has many fighters associated with it. And we all probably privately know of many people that have fought well with their styles.

But the problem is we tend to rest on the coat tails of those before. We know the style works as people have fought well with them. But the question is can we? If it doesn't work then we should blame ourselves or the teacher and not the style.

I think if you train with the so called old school students you will find that some of them actually do fight pretty hard. Some of them have some good solid understanding of what they can and can't do. Like was mentioned earlier, Dog Bros and other MMA people didn't invent testing the system. Perhaps they just revived it from those that are more fatuated with the beauty and technical aspects of the art without the real application of it. Perhaps similar to the hippie tai chi one sees at the parks.

[anerlich]

I've not attacked anyone personally on this forum.

What utter bu11sh!t. T's attacked and insulted senior TMA stylists collectively and individually and done the same to a number of forum members as well. That hardly makes him Robinson Crusoe, but that combined with above statement makes him a liar.


A complete falsehood by the guy who is quickly becoming the laughing stock of the entire wing chun forum.

I think he attained village idiot status some time ago, to be accurate

(I admit that WAS a personal attack)

[Edmund]

"Stop making this about me!
The topic is all your views/opinions and how much they completely suck!

Your holiness,
Terence"

[Matrix]

Quite frankly, I'm a little bit baffled by intensity of the venom being targeted at Terence.

I don't buy his anti-TMA statements, but what's the big deal?
Why do so many people seem to care so much about his opinion?
I don't think he's a "laughing stock" or an "idiot". He just seems to have some sort of chip on his shoulder. Again, so what?

In true Wing Chun fashion, when we see tension, we should not apply more tension to the situation, but rather change the line.

The day will come when he will either prove himself to be what he thinks he is, or just the opposite. I look forward to that day because either way, we will all learn something.

Peace,
Bill

[Knifefighter]

In BJJ, we do "dead" drilling to develop better coordination, to refine movement, etc. But, even so, those movements are being practiced as they will be done in fighitng -- so you get that 1-to-1-to-1 correspondence. And the "dead" drilling is a very, very small part of the training (less than 10&#37;). The core of the training is live rolling -- sparring.

+1... Exactamente.

[Knifefighter]

Is Alan Orr a quality fighter? Does he do chi sao? Does he compete?

It probably says that Orr and his fighters are successful in spite of chi sao rather than because of it. That and the fact that they include a heavy reliance on BJJ... not to mention a lot of boxing-type mechanics.

[Knifefighter]

Isolating a WCK technique in ChiSao and working it over and over at progressive resistance is no different that a BJJ man working a particular technique with another BJJ man in a cooperative manner, over and over and over again with the proper, energy and positional conditions with variable resistance..

Completely different. BJJ techniques are done full out the same way they are done when drilling. Not so with chi sao.


Does the dead BJJ drilling look like real fighting, when real fighting is you grappling with a boxer, street fighter, MT man?

Yep, it’s the same stuff… same position, same technique.

BJJ doesn’t change whether you are fighting a boxer, a wrestler, or a wing chun guy. The same triangle is done against a BJJ guy, a boxer, or a wrestler. Same with a jab, cross, hook combo done by a boxer against any other type of fighter. Same thing with a clinch done by a modern MMA practitioner. The techniques and positions are practiced almost exactly the same as they are done for real. What changes are the numbers of tools the fighter needs in his toolbox, depending on the skills of his opponent. The more skilled his opponent, the more tools he needs to have mastered.

Chi sao, on the other hand, is a totally artificial construct not seen in real application.

[YungChun]

Completely different. BJJ techniques are done full out the same way they are done when drilling. Not so with chi sao.

Not when people are learning new stuff they aint..

The type of resistance seen by a BJJ man is not the kind of resistance you'll see against a boxer who is not a ground fighter, experienced in ground...


Chi sao, on the other hand, is a totally artificial construct not seen in real application.
Willingness of two BJJ folks to keep sparring on the ground, willingness of two boxers to keep the sparring in punching range are also artificial..

The techniques used in ChiSao or in fighting are the same; Done against anyone.. There is no special *fake* way to do any given technique in ChiSao, that differs from actual application...

If you think there is supposed to be a difference in how any particular technique is applied in ChiSao vs in actual fighting, please tell us exactly what those differences are supposed to be for a given technique.

Again, some "differences" seen in ChiSao, hand chasing, lack of power, lack of correct mechanics, lack of contact, etc, represent poor ChiSao...

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Chi sao, on the other hand, is a totally artificial construct not seen in real application." (K)


***CLUELESS deduction by someone who clearly wasted the x amount of years he spent in wing chun (and he would have you believe it was at least 5 or 6)...

It was wasted it for one reason or another. Take your pick:

(A) -poor instructor (instructor himself was clueless about the inner workings of chi sao/wing chun fighting)...

(B) -poor training methods (ie.- instructor did not spend enough time teaching how to translate chi sao DRILLS to actually combat - like pummeling in grappling, for example: a drill that needs to be translated)...

(C) -not enough patience with where proper chi sao training could take him, K.


ALL THAT SAID, I shall repeat something of a mantra that too many wing chun guys would prefer to ignore: if you spending so much of your training time with forms and drills like chi sao that you AREN'T SPENDING AT LEAST 75 % OF YOUR REMAINING TIME doing other things like sparring, sparring, and sparring...

then you are open to critcism by trolls like Terence and semi-trolls like Dale Frank. Unlike Terence - at least this guy walks his talk about his BJJ/kickboxing MMA matches and stickfighting matches. Terence won't even post a 30 second video of himself waving to the camera, gets caught in his own contradictory posts and double standards left-and-right... while trying unceasingly to spin or downright bull5hit his way out of it...

but TALKS like he knows infinitely more than anybody else around here.

What a joke this guy is, I swear. :rolleyes::eek:

[Knifefighter]

Not when people are learning new stuff they aint..
I do arm bars against fully resisting, skilled opponents the same way I learned them my first time.


The type of resistance seen by a BJJ man is not the kind of resistance you'll see against a boxer who is not a ground fighter, experienced in ground...

As I said, it's just a matter of more tools in the toolbox for the more advanced ground guy.


Willingness of two BJJ folks to keep sparring on the ground, willingness of two boxers to keep the sparring in punching range are also artificial..

Has nothing to do with the "agreed on" range. Turn up the ground range to full force and the techs are the same. Same thing with boxing. Not so with chi sao.

[YungChun]

Not so with chi sao.
Saying it doesn't make it so.. Show or tell us what the differences are *supposed to be* since you seem to think they are supposed to be different... for any given technique...

[Knifefighter]

***CLUELESS deduction by someone who clearly wasted the x amount of years he spent in wing chun (and he would have you believe it was at least 5 or 6)...

It was wasted it for one reason or another. Take your pick:

Clueless is the guy who spends all his time in the cocoon of his little training studio, training from video tapes against his own students and thinking he knows what is up because of this.

A waste of 30 years or so.

[Knifefighter]

Saying it doesn't make it so.. Show or tell us what the differences are *supposed to be* since you seem to think they are supposed to be different... for any given technique...

That's simple. Watch any chi sao drill. Then watch any full contact fight (Alan Orr's guys fights would be good for this). Notice how completely different they are.

[Knifefighter]

(B) -poor training methods (ie.- instructor did not spend enough time teaching how to translate chi sao DRILLS to actually combat - like pummeling in grappling, for example: a drill that needs to be translated)...

LOL... Speaking of clueless- comparing chi sao to pummelling. Pummelling (of course you wouldn't know this because you have never had hands on grappling training from a real grappling coach) is pretty much good to go from the start. Pummeling is done full contact the same way it is practiced. There is no "translating" needed.

[YungChun]

That's simple. Watch any chi sao drill. Then watch any full contact fight (Alan Orr's guys fights would be good for this). Notice how completely different they are.
I am not interested in what so and so does..

ChiSao is SPECIALIZED RANGE TRAINING.. it's a way to focus training on sticking range..really very simple..

The techniques, the tools... a punch, a pak, etc, are the same, there is no "A: punch in ChiSao" and "B: punch in real fighting" where A and B are supposed to be different...

[Ultimatewingchun]

A training studio that's always open to visitors...and a guy who organized, attended, and participated in a sparring event in Cleveland...and a guy who has had plenty of real life streetfighting experience - including twice in the last 6 years on a moving subway car in Brooklyn (I'm 56 now).

And in my 40's, 30's, 20's, teens, etc.

And three assault arrests - including a fight against two guys wherein one of them needed a quick trip to the nearest emergency room for 6 stitches in his ear. (I had no weapon - it was done with one punch).

Just admit it, Dale - you know 5hit about wing chun.

Come on, be a big boy!

You can do it!

I have faith in you...

LOL. :rolleyes:

[Knifefighter]

(A) -poor instructor (instructor himself was clueless about the inner workings of chi sao/wing chun fighting)...

I'll leave you to work that out between yourself and Hawkins, Dan and Richard.

[Knifefighter]

And three assault arrests - including a fight against two guys wherein one of them needed a quick trip to the nearest emergency room for 6 stitches in his ear. (I had no weapon - it was done with one punch).

LOL @ bragging about being arrested for beating up some unsuspecting bums on the street. Um... OK.

All that being arrested for assault 3 times means is that you walk around being an a$$hole to people.

[anerlich]

In true Wing Chun fashion, when we see tension, we should not apply more tension to the situation, but rather change the line.

The day will come when he will either prove himself to be what he thinks he is, or just the opposite.

I'm not sure that Wing Chun (or BJJ or MMA) principles can or deserve to be applied to the fine art of internet flame wars. YMMV.

Terence has stated that he thinks his fighting skills are nothing above average. Certainly not something to be demonstrated.

With this, I see no point arguing. With regard to fighting skills, I'm prepared to accept he is what he thinks he is.

He does seem to think he is such a towering intellect, wit, and visionary that his opinions deserve to be thrust down everyone's throats repeatedly (sorry if that metaphor gives you a distasteful mental picture).

This is a matter of opinion, but IMO the smart money and vast majority opinion would have it as being incorrect. His opinions are all derivative and have been stated better and more succinctly by others.

IMO, the day you are waiting for came and went a long time ago.

[Ultimatewingchun]

What it means, Dale, is that I get a good belly laugh whenever I hear you say that I'm just a cocoon fighter.

BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT NOTHING ELSE TO SAY. :p

You can't defend your positions on chi sao and wing chun because you don't know enough about either one to try and be an expert commentator/analyst around here.

Sorry. :o (Regardless of who taught you).

And as for pummeling - it's basically a drill to teach someone how to establish advantageous grappling arm/body positions - analagous to the way chi sao helps the wing chun fighter learn how to establish certain advantageous striking arm/body positions (ie.- control of the centerline)...

AMOUNGST OTHER THINGS.

Now yes, there's more to be gleaned (IE.- SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES AND COUNTERS) from both than what I described - but these are the two most basic PRINCIPLES that one learns from each of these two drills.

But fights don't start from a pummeling or a chi sao position - hence the need to TRANSLATE what one learns from these two drills (and all other "drills") into an actual combat situation: throwing punches/kicks/blocks/footwork (sparring), clinch fighting, rolling - and in the case of those who crosstrain - all of the above.

[Knifefighter]

But fights don't start from a pummeling or a chi sao position - hence the need to TRANSLATE what one learns from these two drills into an actual combat situation, ie. - throwing punches/kicks/blocking (sparring), clinch fighting, rolling - and in the case of those who crosstrain - all of the above.

As usual, you are completely wrong.

Fights don't start in a pummelling position, nor do they start from the ground. However, they end up in pummelling position, as well as in ground positions. What they don't end up in is chi sao positions.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Wrong again, Dale.

Fights don't end in either chi sao or pumelling positions - but they can pass through those two stages in some manner or another.

And if you don't know what you doing when that happens - then you're going to be in trouble if you're a grappler or a wing chun fighter.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Again, your limited knowledge of wing chun reveals itself, Dale.

If you're a wing chun fighter you better know how to bridge and hit, bridge/redirect and hit, or just plain hit while controlling the POSITION known as the CENTER.

you learn the ins-and-outs of this in chi sao, primarily...

as long as you understand that this is when primarily working in a very close range standup striking distance.

Because if you're not in that place don't use pure wing chun attack the center-of-mass modes of fighting.

It's a striking infight while standing - and very little else.

[Knifefighter]

If you're a wing chun fighter you better know how to bridge and hit, bridge/redirect and hit, or just plain hit while controlling the POSITION known as the CENTER..

Again, youre limited knowledge of actual contact fighting reveals itself. Chi sao teaches you next to nothing about the above. Anyone who knows how to do the above learns it strictly from sparring. That is why sparring and fighting look nothing like chi sao.

[Knifefighter]

Wrong again, Dale.

Fights don't end in either chi sao or pumelling positions - but they can pass through those two stages in some manner or another.

And if you don't know what you doing when that happens - then you're going to be in trouble if you're a grappler or a wing chun fighter.

Fights both "end up" and pass through pummelling positions. As far as chi sao positions, fights neither end up or pass through those positions. Again, you can see this by watching a fight in slow motion and comparing it to chi sao. You will not see any (or if you do, it will be extremely rare) of the postions of chi sao "passed through"... although you might see them passed by.

[YungChun]

Dale you seem to be talking about the starting point of the drill.. The "steering wheel" starting point, what is called rolling, the luk sao. This provides a neutral starting point for the DRILL where we attempt to control the centerline or center space, center of gravity among two partners.. Once past that brief starting point you have execution of technique, counter technique and body position used the same way the WCK fighter will use these techniques in WCK fighting.

Now, will the WCK moves used in the drill look like “fighting”? Certainly it will not look the same if you are talking about two western boxers “fighting” because they are not using WCK techniques.. On the other hand if you have two WCK folks actually fighting the techniques will be the same although time in range or focus on some techniques over others will vary from the DRILLING....

The starting point, the rolling, is certainly an artificial starting point, for the DRILL used to ensure a contact and position focus, wrt to range and centerline occupation neutrality. No one here thinks in real fighting that the opponent will attack us by walking over and displaying a steering wheel movement..

I am sure there are positions that two BJJ folks/wrestlers might start from on the ground that one could say might never be seen in an actual street fight with a NON GRAPPLER, especially since a non grappler would NOT know the position to begin with....!

Agreeing to work ground and not hit each other is also artificial. Since no one in the street is going to be playing by those rules, as would be done in FOCUSED RANGE TRAINING but again it's for TRAINING a DRILL, that's why it's called a DRILL..

In any case the techniques used in ChiSao, Lop Da, Pak Da, punch, palm, etc, are the same techniques WCK uses in fighting.. Again, there is no special WCK way to punch for ChiSao and special WCK way to punch for WCK fighting, where A<>B, except by those who choose to use love taps and indicated non contact moves in their ChiSao DRILLING, which I agree is problematic since then there is little or no relationship to application of said technique in fighting...

[Vajramusti]

Not my intention to discuss/debate with KF who does not understand chi sao. It is also pointless to discuss chi sao with folks who don't do chi sao or the forms- not the only things in wing chun but two fundamental components. Good chi sao is dynamic in nature. Trying to understand chi sao as "positions" is misleading.Gives the impression of statics to a very dynamic process.

Wing chun is not the only way to fight- there are many ways and each involves their own dynamics. Ok with me if anyone wants to something else besides wing chun or they need supplements.

When chi sao is learned well- it teaches things for any range- lat sao teaches closing and moving away and regaining opening and closing lines and angles.

No point in wasting time with dogmatic critiquesof chi sao. There are skilled wing chun folks who have been in real fights who dont see the point of making snips for youtube and who could care less about KF or TN's opinions on chi sao. Gresham's law is alive and well- in internet forums.
Ignoring the two frequent posters and their same old same old repetitive statements is nota bad idea.

joy chaudhuri

[The Xia]

And if you modify the last paragraph a little bit, that can apply for other styles as well.

[Liddel]

It seems to me that if i shared the same limited view of chi sao that Dale and Mr 'T' do then id be as much a Wing Chun basher as they are.

But i dont !

Personally i think you both have a limited view of VT on the whole.

As my Canadian Friend posted earlier...So what, who cares ?

DREW

[Lugoman]

You know, this whole "_ing _un Sucks!" thing inspires me to know more and train harder at Wing Chun to discover what it is that has everyone so worried.

Everyone knows that penguins cannot fly but you don't see anyone making the effort to denigrate them for it, there is no "Penguins Suck!" month that I am aware of with videos of penguins not flying on youtube. So there must be something to this _ing _un stuff.

I mean, most even minded people don't expend so much worry and effort on something others are doing unless it directly effects them somehow.

Think I'll go practice SLT in celebration of "_ing _un Sucks!" month. :D

[k gledhill]

http://www.philippbayer.net/ some chisao training ....small module get out your eyeglasses ;) notice striking through arms not chasing them , while maintaining distances ...training.
Kinves show entry from a perimiter to sides not ,kamikaze down centers

[gabe]

It probably says that Orr and his fighters are successful in spite of chi sao rather than because of it. That and the fact that they include a heavy reliance on BJJ... not to mention a lot of boxing-type mechanics.

That's one way to look at it. I'm not talking about the other things they do; I'm talking about chi sao. Try to focus.
He has competition experience. He does all the things you MMAists advocate- live sparring , competing, grappling, etc. Now you are saying he is not intelligent enough to discard something that is utterly useless to his training. That your analysis of fighting and training is much better than his. An implication that T is making as well, and he has far less standing to make it than either of you.

If Orr says chi sao helps him with x, y and z, the both of you would still be shaking your head with your eyes closed.:o

[t_niehoff]

"Call him out? Are you serious? He wouldn't fight a little girl. None of the grandmasters would. Because then we'd see what little in the way of skills they really have and their livlihood would go down the drain."

Here you are attacking a view, or are you attacking Chen Xiao Wang? Not just his skills but his character.


I could beat CXW in tennis too -- is that a personal attack? No. It is the truth. Why could I beat him at tennis? Because I'vve been playing tennis for over 30 years, have played competitively, was on my university team, trained with some top guys, etc. He hasn't done this work. It's the same with fighting -- doing forms, push hands or chi sao, etc. won't make you a fighter, it won't give you fighting skill. And these guys -- the grandmasters -- know that. That's precisely why none of them will fight. They *know* they don't have any significant fighting skills. They are out there selling themselves. If they could fight, they'd be doing it to better sell themselves. They are selling false images, fantasy, role-playing BS.



"The fact that some TMAist got their ass handed to them by other TMAists is not surprising -- one poor fighter defeats another poor fighter. Where are the TMAists that can defeat decent fighters? "

And here you are attacking ME, not a view. And you've lumped me into your strawman TMAist without knowing a thing about me, or the people I spar. You don't even know my views, except as they pertain to you.


No, I am not attacking you (I'm not saying anything about your person) -- I'm saying that no one can develop significant fighting skills unless they go through a certain specific process. If they don't, they will suck. That process of open skill development is contrary to everything the traditional martial arts promote.



What a moron. You are preaching a process which you have provided no evidence that you have walked. And refuse to provide such evidence. You routinely call into question other people's qualifications when you have none to speak of. Who has Terrence fought of quality? Where is the video?
LOL:D


That is a personal attack. ;) The evidence is in the training routine of every single quality fighter -- they all use, regardless of their style or art -- the same open skill development process. All open skill athletes, regardless of the sport or activity, do too. And it is understood and explained in every modern textbook onmotor skill development. That's f*cking evidence for you.

What you don't see is anyonewho doesn't use that process developing decentlevel skills.



Is Alan Orr a quality fighter? Does he do chi sao? Does he compete? Should we listen to him or to you? Whose opinion is worth more? Do you lecture or preach to him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2bhkTFjWKo


Alan is a good fighter. Yes, he does chi sao. All you have to do is look at his fights and ask yourself a simple question: where is the chi sao? Because if he is not moving in fighting like he does in chi sao, then he is training one way (chi sao) and moving another in fighting. This is poor training by any standard.

The reason Alan is good is that he trains like a fighter and uses the open skill development process. He trains with NHB fighters --whcih includes sparring with quality opponents -- and works with a top-level fight trainer. He is good because he does these things, not because he does chi sao.



Here is the evidence of a guy that does chi sao and fights and wins. What does that say about Terrence's expositions on chi sao?

Wait a minute, Terrence who? The non-authority? LOL

You could find evidence of someone that routinely has high colonics and fights too -- but that doesn't mean the high colonics have anything to do with his fighting skills. ;)

[t_niehoff]

That's one way to look at it. I'm not talking about the other things they do; I'm talking about chi sao. Try to focus.
He has competition experience. He does all the things you MMAists advocate- live sparring , competing, grappling, etc. Now you are saying he is not intelligent enough to discard something that is utterly useless to his training. That your analysis of fighting and training is much better than his. An implication that T is making as well, and he has far less standing to make it than either of you.

If Orr says chi sao helps him with x, y and z, the both of you would still be shaking your head with your eyes closed.:o

Instead of trying to guess what Alan is thinking, look at what he is doing in his fights and compare that to what he is doing in his training. Chi sao is an entirely unrealistic drill as it does not look or feel or correspond or compare to what contact fighting will look or feel like. They are apples and oranges. And this is easy to see -- just go do some genuine sustained contact fighting with nonWCK people. You won't be able to move or act or respond or behave anything like you do in chi sao. It is a completely different context/situation. All that chi sao can do is help you learn the contact tools, but it can't teach you how to appropriately use those tools in fighting -- the only way to do that is by fighting.

[t_niehoff]

In any case the techniques used in ChiSao, Lop Da, Pak Da, punch, palm, etc, are the same techniques WCK uses in fighting.. Again, there is no special WCK way to punch for ChiSao and special WCK way to punch for WCK fighting, where A<>B, except by those who choose to use love taps and indicated non contact moves in their ChiSao DRILLING, which I agree is problematic since then there is little or no relationship to application of said technique in fighting...


Yes, those are the same tools but -- and this is the important but -- how you will **use** them, when you will use them, how you set them up, how you put them into your fight game, etc. is very, very different than how you practice them in chi sao. Chi sao is an entirely different situation/context than fighting. Fighting is a different game than chi sao. And you can only learn to play that game with the WCK tools by playing that game with the WCK tools. Chi sao "works" because both players are programmed to do things within certain prescribed parameters; anytime those parameters are violated, chi sao breaks down. Those parameters won't be involved in fighting. As chi sao does not correspond to fighting, the more you do chi sao, the more you habituate moving in ways (using your tools to play that game) that is unlike what you will need to do in fighting (even worse, if you try to use chi saoto extrapolate tofighting). And this can be seen clearly by just starting in contact and fighting with some nonWCK people -- you'll see that your chi sao trained habits of movement (how you have learned to use the tools), won't work. You can't learn to solve the problems of contact fighting with the WCK tools from chi sao; chi sao can only help you learn the tools,not how to use them.

Let me try to illustrate what I mean: you can practice your lop da in the lop sao drill or in the chi sao drill but you will never be able to use it in fighting. Why? Because those drills train the movement itself, not the situation/context in fighting when you can consistently and reliably use the movement. The lop sao and chi sao drills are unrealistic and work only because both sides behave in certain prescribed ways that permit us to practice these movements. Once you can comfortably do the movement, the next step is putting that movement into a fighting context and then practicing it there. Until you do that, you have the movement, the technique, the tool, but it hasn't become a fighting skill.

[t_niehoff]

Lop sao is only for turning people on their axis if we cant sustain a forward attack...jutsao
not lopsao ..but you knew that T ? ;)


You miss the larger point. Whatever you *believe* the drill if for (theory is lovely), it only teaches the tool, technque, movement not the fighting context/situation -- when you can really do it, how to really do it, how to set it up, etc. The drill and what goes on in the drill does not correspond to what goes on in fighting, they are two very different games.




terence your digging a deep hole , called a well...there is a chinese story of a frog in such a situation...all he see's above him in the circle of sky is all he thinks there is ...the rest is for you to find out . i find even attempting to aid your quest is a waste of time .

Yes, yes, I know . . . I've been hearing the same bullsh1t for 25 years . . .

[gabe]

If Orr says chi sao helps him with x, y and z, the both of you would still be shaking your head with your eyes closed

Had to repeat that.

Shall we listen to the waterboy/cheerleader or the guy that gets out on the field?:D

Clearly, you still can't understand when you are making a personal attack.:rolleyes: I do, however. And I don't deny mine.:)

And funny to watch you insult Orr on his intelligence with regard to fighting and training. Is Orr a mindless teacher worshipping close minded stick to tradition practitioner? If he states that chi sao helps him with x, y and z, you have no basis or standing to say otherwise. Neither can KF. If neither of you practise it or make no attempts to use it, you have no ability to judge its value. You can try to reduce the analysis to some silly black and white logic, but that only shows your amateur level thinking.

So will the waterboy/cheerleader tell the fighter how he should fight? What if he uses that authoritative tone of his?:o

[sleestack33]

Hello all,

I started training at the Tulsa Judo Club about a month ago and it's been an amazing experience. I lurk around this forum every now and then and I've been keeping up with this debate between most of you and Terence. FWIW, I'd like to point out a few things I've noticed and experienced.

First of all, the judo training is full of what Matt Thornton and Terence call "dead drills". The beginning judoka works on falls, throws, sweeps, holds and everything else in a step by step manner with a non-resisting opponent for the first month. After that month drills are worked 2 days a week. Some are "dead drills" and some are with a semi- resisting opponent. Randori is done on Satrudays only. The coach stresses these drills big time and even the high level black belts do them. This is a well respected Judo Club with 32 national and international medalists since 1980. So I think the idea that these so called "dead drill" are worthless is a fallacy.

Back in the early 1990's I trained at the Mainstreet Boxing gym in downtown Tulsa. Plenty of "dead drill" training going on there as well. IMO this whole Matt Thornton "aliveness" thing, allthough valid in many ways, is mainly a way to separate himself for maketing. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just disagree with what they call "dead drills" as having no value.

Now, having said that, I agree with a lot of what Terence says about the state of Wing Chun. I've trained in 2 different systems since '91 and have visited 4 others in various states. Not one of those 4 schools had any kind of sparring program. Many of us have probably trained at schools like these. I know I have. You simply cannot learn to fight without fighting. But we all know that, right?

I agree with Terence a lot even though he's repetitous and sometimes way over the top. If your school spars with heavy contact on a regular basis, then your gonna be able to fight. You may not be entering UFC anytime soon, but you'll definately have some skills. And this BS about wing chun people not being able to develop any significant skills sparring with each other is crap. You just have to train right.

Regarding chi sao, well without it you may as well not do wing chun. Allthough over emphasized by some schools IMO, I think it's an important drill. I see it's value anytime my opponent grabs my arms, or anytime I grab my opponents arms, or anytime there's contact between us period. The usefullness of the drill for fighting has nothing to do with "chi sao positions". It's about developing an awareness of your body movement and your opponents body movement. Just like wrestlers do. I think of it as stand up grappling. Some may disagree with that but that's okay. Just because you don't see "chi sao positions" in fighting doesn't mean the benefits aren't there.

I usually don't post on the forums because everyone is so critical of each other and full of personal insults. I don't see any reason to ever get personal here. I'ts silly and rediculous. Besides, I think I've learned more by lurking the past several years than I could have by posting my opinion all the time. Believe it or not, I wouldn't be doing Judo right now if it weren't for TN's numerous posts on the subject of groung fighting. And I'm enjoying the hell out of judo right now. So thank you Terence.

[t_niehoff]

If Orr says chi sao helps him with x, y and z, the both of you would still be shaking your head with your eyes closed

Had to repeat that.

Shall we listen to the waterboy/cheerleader or the guy that gets out on the field?:D

Clearly, you still can't understand when you are making a personal attack.:rolleyes: I do, however. And I don't deny mine.:)

And funny to watch you insult Orr on his intelligence with regard to fighting and training. Is Orr a mindless teacher worshipping close minded stick to tradition practitioner? If he states that chi sao helps him with x, y and z, you have no basis or standing to say otherwise. Neither can KF. If neither of you practise it or make no attempts to use it, you have no ability to judge its value. You can try to reduce the analysis to some silly black and white logic, but that only shows your amateur level thinking.

So will the waterboy/cheerleader tell the fighter how he should fight? What if he uses that authoritative tone of his?:o

Dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

It's funny that you call *me* the waterboy/cheerleader -- when you are not doing it, getting out and fighting/sparring with quality people, yourself. FWIW, my views come from doing just that. Just like my training brother Alan. And my training brother Dave. And its funny too because you evidently haven't seen the posts by Nick, one of Alan's guys, talking about how chi sao is WCK with "the training wheels on". Guess he doesn't "get it" too? We all "get it" because we are all doing it. Unlike you. Because if you were doing it, you could speak from experience and not from theory -- as you are. Dale "gets it" too. Every fighter does. The only people who don't "get it" are the guys with their heads up their asses, who are living in a fantasy world. They don't get it because they don't want to get it.

If Robert and Alan want to use a traditional drill/exercise like chi sao as a means to *teach*, that is up to them. If they want to use forms to teach, to carry on the tradition, that is up to them. But they both realize -- and I know this from talking with them both and from how they train -- the serious limitations of forms and chi sao. They both know what anyone who wants to develop significant fighting skill needs to do.

[t_niehoff]

Hello all,

I started training at the Tulsa Judo Club about a month ago and it's been an amazing experience. I lurk around this forum every now and then and I've been keeping up with this debate between most of you and Terence. FWIW, I'd like to point out a few things I've noticed and experienced.

First of all, the judo training is full of what Matt Thornton and Terence call "dead drills". The beginning judoka works on falls, throws, sweeps, holds and everything else in a step by step manner with a non-resisting opponent for the first month. After that month drills are worked 2 days a week. Some are "dead drills" and some are with a semi- resisting opponent. Randori is done on Satrudays only. The coach stresses these drills big time and even the high level black belts do them. This is a well respected Judo Club with 32 national and international medalists since 1980. So I think the idea that these so called "dead drill" are worthless is a fallacy.

Back in the early 1990's I trained at the Mainstreet Boxing gym in downtown Tulsa. Plenty of "dead drill" training going on there as well. IMO this whole Matt Thornton "aliveness" thing, allthough valid in many ways, is mainly a way to separate himself for maketing. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just disagree with what they call "dead drills" as having no value.


FWIW, I don't agree with Thornton's views on dead or unrealistic drills either.

"Dead" drills and unrealistic drills do have value IMO, they do have their place. And it is an important place -- in learning (learning a skill and practicing it to the point you can comfortably perform it). We can't learn very well in a "live", realistic environment. Imagine trying to learn to fall, giving that the attention you need to, focusing on it, etc. when in a sparring situation. It would be overwhelming. Dead and unrealistic drills permit us to learn, to practice, to repeat skills in a focused way. And as you point out, you see dead and unrealsitic drills in all athletic activities.

But, while they have value in a certain context, they can also be harmful or useless beyond that learning context. While they can teach you a skill or technique, the ability to use that skill or technique in a realistic/alive context comes from doing just that -- practicing it in an alive and realistic context. It's this second step that some never seem to take.



Now, having said that, I agree with a lot of what Terence says about the state of Wing Chun. I've trained in 2 different systems since '91 and have visited 4 others in various states. Not one of those 4 schools had any kind of sparring program. Many of us have probably trained at schools like these. I know I have. You simply cannot learn to fight without fighting. But we all know that, right?


No, they don't.



I agree with Terence a lot even though he's repetitous and sometimes way over the top. If your school spars with heavy contact on a regular basis, then your gonna be able to fight. You may not be entering UFC anytime soon, but you'll definately have some skills. And this BS about wing chun people not being able to develop any significant skills sparring with each other is crap. You just have to train right.


And the way to know if you are "training right" is to compare what you are doing with what good fighters are doing -- in terms of the process for developing skill.

BTW, I know that I am repetitious and sometimes provocative but please understand that's because I am repeatedly presented with the same repetitious nonsense (and there's more of it).



Regarding chi sao, well without it you may as well not do wing chun. Allthough over emphasized by some schools IMO, I think it's an important drill. I see it's value anytime my opponent grabs my arms, or anytime I grab my opponents arms, or anytime there's contact between us period. The usefullness of the drill for fighting has nothing to do with "chi sao positions". It's about developing an awareness of your body movement and your opponents body movement. Just like wrestlers do. I think of it as stand up grappling. Some may disagree with that but that's okay. Just because you don't see "chi sao positions" in fighting doesn't mean the benefits aren't there.


The exercise does teach some contact skills - there is no doubt about that. But it doesn't teach you how to use those contact skills as you will in fighting. As you pointed out, you only learn to fight by fighting. The problem is not with chi sao, but with people not realizing its inherent limitations.



I usually don't post on the forums because everyone is so critical of each other and full of personal insults. I don't see any reason to ever get personal here. I'ts silly and rediculous. Besides, I think I've learned more by lurking the past several years than I could have by posting my opinion all the time. Believe it or not, I wouldn't be doing Judo right now if it weren't for TN's numerous posts on the subject of groung fighting. And I'm enjoying the hell out of judo right now. So thank you Terence.

You're welcome! :)

If my posts get people to critically think and examine things in WCK (or the martial arts) for themselves and/or to seek out genuine martial experience or to expand their views/experiences, then I am extremely gratified. Thank you.

[southernkf]

If Robert and Alan want to use a traditional drill/exercise like chi sao as a means to *teach*, that is up to them. If they want to use forms to teach, to carry on the tradition, that is up to them. But they both realize -- and I know this from talking with them both and from how they train -- the serious limitations of forms and chi sao. They both know what anyone who wants to develop significant fighting skill needs to do.

This may be against my better judgment of skipping on this thread. In any case, I don't think this mentality is limited to Robert (Chu?) or Alan (Orr?). I wouldn't call Forms and Chi Sau limitations, just tools or methods along the way. A Guitar player may not play the Circle of 5ths during a show, but he tends to refer to it quite a bit and uses it as a guide. Scales don't sound good when played as such, but the are a major part of playing the guitar. Working forms and Chi Sau are similar. They are tools that one should learn to learn the finer points and one can find lots of benifit in them, just as scales and progressions. Some people may not need scales and the circle of 5ths to play music, or may learn a simple scale that they barely know, yet they can make good music. A wing chun person may be able to get good with out the forms and Chi Sau, but they are tools to help understand, preserve, pass on, train, play with, etc the art.

I would be wary of a teacher that claims you will learn to be a great wing chun person if you only practice the forms and chi sau. If they don't advocate free form engagements, then it is questionable. If you as a person don't seek it out, then your only getting part of the system. On the other side, I would also be wary of any one who says you don't need this or that. To me it is someone who either doesn't really understand why it is there or has decided to embrace a different philosophy, which in that case it is no longer wing chun, in my mind.

[gabe]

Dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

It's funny that you call *me* the waterboy/cheerleader -- when you are not doing it, getting out and fighting/sparring with quality people, yourself. FWIW, my views come from doing just that. Just like my training brother Alan. And my training brother Dave. And its funny too because you evidently haven't seen the posts by Nick, one of Alan's guys, talking about how chi sao is WCK with "the training wheels on". Guess he doesn't "get it" too? We all "get it" because we are all doing it. Unlike you. Because if you were doing it, you could speak from experience and not from theory -- as you are. Dale "gets it" too. Every fighter does. The only people who don't "get it" are the guys with their heads up their asses, who are living in a fantasy world. They don't get it because they don't want to get it.

If Robert and Alan want to use a traditional drill/exercise like chi sao as a means to *teach*, that is up to them. If they want to use forms to teach, to carry on the tradition, that is up to them. But they both realize -- and I know this from talking with them both and from how they train -- the serious limitations of forms and chi sao. They both know what anyone who wants to develop significant fighting skill needs to do.

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You assume I'm speaking from theory. Did I ever mention to you one of my sparring partners has 30 years in Japanese Jujitsu? Go ahead, make your assumptions. You like to resort to your convenient strawmen approachs. Who said chi sao has no limitations? Duh. Another strawman assumption on your part as to how I view it. Do you think everyone that disagrees with you just does chi sao all day, if at all? If we think chi sao is usefull, then we obviously don't spar, do nothing live, etc. etc. Very amateur.

If Orr "gets it," why does he do chi sao? Why teach it or train it? He's teaching something totally useless for tradition's sake???!!!

This is not about its limitations, its about it's usefullness as a tool. Can you not distinguish? Orr sees it. You don't. I offer you a guy that understands the "process" but disagrees with you. If he did agree with you, he'd discard it. If he wasn't your brother, you'd say his head is up his a$$. Oh, and don't lump yourself in Orr's or KF's category. Orr doesn't mouth off or preach to people and KF at least backs his view with personal evidence. You're just a mouth.

I mention Orr because he is a perfect example of someone who "gets it" by YOUR definition, yet you still don't respect his opinion. Does sleestack33 also not "get it?" He is exactly on point as far as I'm concerned. So my only view or position on this thread, is not the usefulness of chi sao. (Who really cares). It's just how silly you are, T. But you are doing a great job at revealing that yourself. Carry on. I need to follow Anerlich's suggestions about you.

[k gledhill]

You miss the larger point. Whatever you *believe* the drill if for (theory is lovely), it only teaches the tool, technque, movement not the fighting context/situation -- when you can really do it, how to really do it, how to set it up, etc. The drill and what goes on in the drill does not correspond to what goes on in fighting, they are two very different games.




Yes, yes, I know . . . I've been hearing the same bullsh1t for 25 years . . .

your avoiding the fact you dont know what your talking about.:D

[anerlich]

Yes, yes, I know . . . I've been hearing the same bullsh1t for 25 years . . .

This is what runs through my mind when I read T's posts.

[YungChun]

Those parameters won't be involved in fighting. As chi sao does not correspond to fighting

If this were true then there would not be any point to training ChiSao.


the more you do chi sao, the more you habituate moving in ways (using your tools to play that game) that is unlike what you will need to do in fighting

Yes if the drill is not done correctly, as is most often the case.


And this can be seen clearly by just starting in contact and fighting with some nonWCK people

Again, if you are not training to USE THEIR DISENGAGEMENT, which is what the non WCK and even some WCK will do, then you are not using ChiSao correctly, to train the correct responses.

The tools DO work the same way otherwise there would be no point in doing ChiSao.. A hammer is used to drive a nail no matter the "context" of the nail.

The techniques work or not, based on position, timing and energy.. The positions, energy, timing are what determines WHAT technique works or not no matter the "context" eg ChiSao or real fighting, that’s why it is conditioned response training.. IN WCK we clear the center because the center is occupied—if the center is not occupied, we do not need to clear it..

It does not matter if the center is occupied by a Wing Chun man, a Butcher, a Baker or a Candlestick maker, we clear the center because it is occupied, and how we clear it is based on the opponent’s energy and position wrt our position. There are only so many ways ARMS CLASH…PERIOD!


You can practice your lop da in the lop sao drill or in the chi sao drill but you will never be able to use it in fighting. Why? Because those drills train the movement itself, not the situation/context in fighting when you can consistently and reliably use the movement. The lop sao and chi sao drills are unrealistic and work only because both sides behave in certain prescribed ways that permit us to practice these movements. Once you can comfortably do the movement, the next step is putting that movement into a fighting context and then practicing it there. Until you do that, you have the movement, the technique, the tool, but it hasn't become a fighting skill.
The conditions are the same in ChiSao, not the Lop Sao baby drill, in terms of position and energy otherwise there would be no need to use the technique—remember there are only so many ways human arms can clash...

This does not mean that ChiSao is the end all be all, or that one does not need to spar to develop good fighting skills.. One must train visual sensitivity in addition to tactile sensitivity.. However, the positional and energy references DO CORRISPOND since they DEFINE what tools CAN BE USED OR NOT...

Again, if the center is open there is no need to clear it.. If the center is occupied and you HAVE contact then the very same conditions—the positional references, energy references are the same at range: Again, there are only so many ways one can leave the line, occupy the line. Most everyone has two arms, they can only move in certain ways, up, down, left, right, and so on.. We clear and remove OBSTRUCTIONS to the target in ChiSao in the SAME WAY we remove them in close range contact FIGHTING, we train to FILL OPEN SPACE with SPRING ENERGY when there is NO OBSTRUCTION, with WCK tools and footwork, mechanics, the same way in ChiSao as we do in fighting, if YOU DON'T then YOU HAVE a disconnect.. The CONDITIONS when in CONTACT, from a positional and energy references point MUST be the same or you are not using ChiSao as intended..

ChiSao DOES train WCK contact fighting tools and tactics and even bleeds over into non contact to some degree. Many of us have first hand experience having benefited from this training and know very well how it translates.. In the end, sparring/fighting with good people is essential to put it all together, but the ChiSao is a very important, RELEVANT and integral component in WCK training..

[Liddel]

The only people who don't "get it" are the guys with their heads up their asses, who are living in a fantasy world. They don't get it because they don't want to get it.

Many of us get it we just dont agree 100&#37;. So then you say we cant fight, or we are "Traditional non fighter"s. What BS, T, it aint that cut and dry IMHO.

Personally i dont lump myself in that boat so im not so keen anymore to put foward my ideas like others around here...

Good work mate, your making this forum a fantastic place to come a 'share' ideas.
Even when a large group of us share the same POV with you on certain aspects.
You should be proud. :p

DREW

[Edmund]

Hi sleestack33,

I also have been doing a lot of Judo over the past year. Big comp this weekend actually.



Now, having said that, I agree with a lot of what Terence says about the state of Wing Chun. I've trained in 2 different systems since '91 and have visited 4 others in various states. Not one of those 4 schools had any kind of sparring program. Many of us have probably trained at schools like these. I know I have. You simply cannot learn to fight without fighting. But we all know that, right?


I believe most WC people on the forum advocate sparring as a very important part of WC training.

To have T tell you that you aren't sparring properly is laughable when a few years ago it was HIM who was saying over and over that sparring and cross-training in groundfighting is BAD FOR WC. He didn't like doing any sort of conditioning or boxing or jujitsu or muay thai. And anyone who did was watering down the pure art of WC and obviously their teachers were terrible.

Now he tries to portray the wise advocate of all these things. I don't think I've ever seen anyone flip-flop as hard as Terence has. He's been doing WC for 25 years and MMA for something like 1 year! (maybe a bit more but he's no expert.)

So for him to troll the forum like a teen UFC fanboy effectively cross-posting something from Bullshido, makes me fairly cynical about the value of his words. Just goes to show that a MMA newbie can parrot a good proverb and make it sound totally naff.

[Ultimatewingchun]

This thread has become a perfect example of why I put both Terence and Knifefighter on the IGNORE list. Terence is as phony as a three dollar bill - since he tries to beat everyone down with his now famous "I know what fighting is all about and you don't know 5hit - including what quality wing chun training/fighting is"...WHILE HE CAN'T BACK UP EVEN ONE SYLLABLE of his endless posts to the effect I just described either in person (he didn't show up in Cleveland after running his braggadoccio mouth like a waterfall for months) - and he won't post even 10 seconds of himself doing ANYTHING...

and the other guy - while having some real, verifiable credentials in other arts (including vids of his fights that we've all seen by now)...NONETHELESS - he knows basically nothing about wing chun.

Here's a quote from Phil Redmond from a conversation we had today on the phone (Phil called me after reading Dale's crap on this thread):

"When he worked out with my student, Rahsun, and during the conversations we had that day - he said NUMEROUS times that 'I didn't know wing chun did/had this'...'I didn't know wing chun did/had that'...etc.

by why of complimenting the wing chun he was seeing (and experiencing) that day.

"And here he is talking 5hit about chi sao being artificial, wing chun is ineffective, etc....what a hypocrite."

I KNOW, PHIL. I KNOW.

MY APOLOGIES TO THE REST OF THE WING CHUN FORUM for reading their posts and responding once again to their arrogant troll/fool/clueless/nonsense/wing chun sucks posts. I wanted to try and lead by example (I think we all should be IGNORING them) - but I give myself a failing grade this semester.

I allowed myself to be sucked into the mire once again.

I'll do my best not to let it happen again. :rolleyes:

THESE TWO GUYS ARE POISONING THE WING CHUN FORUM.

[sihing]

I think the best way to look at people like T and KF is too realize that there is usually an agenda behind what they are saying, otherwise why would they be here if they do not believe in the WC training system? For me, why would I spend time on a TKD forum when I don't believe it is a really effective form of MA for fighting? Why would I waste my time trying to convince them that what they do will usually get them into trouble on the street, unless of course I have an agenda to promote? I don't know what T's and KF agenda is but there is definitely something behind all the BS coming from their keyboards.

Another thing to realize is either you have faith in what you are doing or you don't. For me I do, and I also have faith and trust in the people that I am involved with, that they know what they are talking about and for the simple fact that they have been down the road before. I realized a long time ago that there are a multitude of ways to fight, all of them effective in their own right, but what keeps me coming back to Wing Chun was the fact that when learned correctly and applied naturally it is beauty in motion, effectiveness in action, but not hell on the body. I've seen people in this art that weren't all around athletes, training like a mad man, make it work (including myself). Can they/I fight against the pro MMA/train like mad people of the world, probably not, but that is neither the goal nor the intention. Put anyone into a train like mad environment with good coaches supervising and you will have great improvement in fighting skill in no time flat. I for one am not into that, it's a competitive based world, and I could care less about trophy's, fame, glory, fighting guys I have no problems with and enduring injuries, it's just not my scene. On a strictly personal level I've had people that I've taught tell me how WC/VT has helped them succeed in fighting and/or sparring with other styles of Martial Art, and we haven't even scratched the surface of what this art has to offer other than the basics of structure, body engine and a few concepts related to fighting. So when two people that I don't even know, that I have very little knowledge about, start stating negativity about WC/VT training methods, it doesn't really matter when I have personal experience to prove otherwise.

I've always believed that you can learn something from everyone you meet. I have no doubt that Terence and Dale could teach me plenty about what they consider effective Martial Arts. The thing is I am not interested in what they have to offer at this time, and don't see that changing anytime soon:)

James

[drleungjohn]

After watching those clips of the two of them-and having many others watch them as well-they are much more informative of Dale's skills then his commercial he put together

It would have been nice if Rashun was able to actually PUNCH-which is WCK 's main weapon-and then see what happens-because the law of averages alone states if you are only going to block-you're gonna get hit eventually-or taken down in this situation-

Dale ignored all the simulated punches thrown by Rashun and did his BBJ shtick-and when on his back-and with Rashun over him-he continues to say Come on attack me-so Rashun"simulates punches again-which he ignores and continues to make comments about what he thinks he knows

But he is an expert at name calling--I just wonder now if the "kinder,gentler KF" is is actually worried somebody might Go and see him since we have found that the Internet and keyboard is no shield anymore

[Liddel]

For me, why would I spend time on a TKD forum when I don't believe it is a really effective form of MA for fighting? Why would I waste my time trying to convince them that what they do will usually get them into trouble on the street, James

James, i think its more like going to a TKD forum and stating that kicking is an important part of fighting, then when they state they put great emphasis on kicking then you assume and say they dont kick or practice right.

Then when you say how to kick right (totally your opinion) they reply by describing the similarities between what they do and your explanation of 'correct kicking', only to have you continue to pipe on about how they are non fighting theory lovers. At which time you copy and paste your post in every thread.... LOL

:p :o

DREW

[TenTigers]

if I may add my two cents-for what its worth...I think alot of you are missing the point, which is, people are arguing that they don't see chi-sao in the fighting. Well, of course you wouldn't. 99.9&#37; of fighting in Wing Chun is striking.You don't go in to stick, you don't go in to trap, you go in to strike. If,per chance, there is contact with an obstacle,, then you will go through at an available angle (which isn't seen, but felt), or go around it, or continue with the other hand-which might not be in contact(you have two hands) or anything else.( Lut-sao,jik-chung-Thrust forward when the hand is free.) But you will not "see" anything that resembles chi-sao, because it is training one split second of contact, and the reaction to it. BY FEEL. So it should look like striking. Chi-sao isn't any more fighting than practicing any other tool development drill designed to train an attribute. Ever see football players run through the tires,lifting their legs? Does it look like football? Sure, there are definately drills that are the exact thing as the skill you are striving to develop, but I am sure, if you racked your brains, you could find many drills, which are sport-specific, that do not exactly mimic the way they are applied. Rope-skipping is one. Can you think of others? But you never see people rank on football or boxing because of this,do you? And yet....

[anerlich]

I think T's problem is that, as Edmund says, he has recently seen that his past training has had flaws.

Anyone with half a brain can see that most, if not all styles are open to this perhaps some more than others, but ...

Rather than doing the hard work of rectifying the problems himself and thus dealing with the contradictions that eat away at him from the inside like old style absinthe does to the brain, he seems to want everyone else to do the hard work of "renovating" WC to make it into his opinion of a workable combat system, or to join him in the despair he feels at what he sees as years (25?) of wasted time. And perhaps feels concerned that most of us twigged to it long before he did, which makes him feel inadequate in comparison.

Those may be some of the reasons for this furioso of hectoring, ridicule and complaint.

[YungChun]

if I may add my two cents-for what its worth...I think alot of you are missing the point, which is, people are arguing that they don't see chi-sao in the fighting. Well, of course you wouldn't. 99.9&#37; of fighting in Wing Chun is striking.You don't go in to stick, you don't go in to trap, you go in to strike. If,per chance, there is contact with an obstacle,, then you will go through at an available angle (which isn't seen, but felt), or go around it, or continue with the other hand-which might not be in contact(you have two hands) or anything else.( Lut-sao,jik-chung-Thrust forward when the hand is free.) But you will not "see" anything that resembles chi-sao, because it is training one split second of contact, and the reaction to it. BY FEEL. So it should look like striking. Chi-sao isn't any more fighting than practicing any other tool development drill designed to train an attribute. Ever see football players run through the tires,lifting their legs? Does it look like football? Sure, there are definately drills that are the exact thing as the skill you are striving to develop, but I am sure, if you racked your brains, you could find many drills, which are sport-specific, that do not exactly mimic the way they are applied. Rope-skipping is one. Can you think of others? But you never see people rank on football or boxing because of this,do you? And yet....

Most of us 'get this'... I sometimes refer to this as ‘micro moment training.’

The techniques however are the same techniques and when removing obstructions, etc, they are the same or similar conditions, angles, mechanics, forward spring energy, WCK uses in fighting once you get past the luk sao, etc. Many students who do ChiSao will start off rolling and before long be doing what some call 'gor sao' which is closer to fighting, where 'fighting' means they are trying to bash each other into submission, via control of the line... It depends on the emphasis of the drill... You can break it down, put it together, but if the reactions, conditions used are not relevant, the same or very close to the same as those conditions, eg obstructions, energy, filling space with spring energy, as exists in actual fighting, then there can be no or little useful skill being developed..

There ARE disconnects however.. Many folks are not training ChiSao correctly and so there becomes less and less relevance to fighting.. When you take away any of the core WCK 'training concepts' or attributes from ChiSao, add in some one hit wonder moves and then develop counters for all of the above ChiSao becomes about as relevant to Wing Chun fighting as playing patty cake.. Some of those who train that way may well come to a place where they realize there is little or no relevance to actual fighting, and they are correct. Then the next thing you know they are dumping the drill because "it doesn't work.." So how one trains ChiSao will directly effect how relevant the skills developed in the drill are to fighting, which is another whole ball of wax in tbe WCK community..

When I came from karate I already had it in my head that training to fight meant actually sparring.. I had been sparring in a hard style karate school with hard to full contact and also with my friends before I came to WCK.. Carrying around sparring gear was the norm and sparring was 'no big deal' win or lose..although losing can be painful..but you still get something out of it..

My MAIN interest at that time was getting better at sparring and fighting and so I USED WCK as a vehicle for my sparring at that time... I remember not long after I started WCK, I was training for about six months and I got into the strangest argument (I thought at the time) with one of my close si hings, he had maybe a month or two on me... I told him we really should be sparring so we can start learning to apply this stuff in fighting.. I was still sparring with my friends but felt that I needed more.. So my sihing says to me YOU MEAN YOU WANT TO TEST YOUR KUNG FU... Test? I said, no we have to learn to apply it by sparring, by applying it in sparring.. And this just made no sense to him.. He repeated.. YOU MEAN YOU WANT TO TEST YOUR KUNG FU... After arguing this for a hour I realized that we just had two different ideas about how you go about "learning to apply." Very strange I thought..

This apparently is part of the problem with CMA it seems more so than with the JMA, where in my experience, the JMA comes in with little in the way of theory and DRILLS so all they have left is learning to fight by fighting/sparring.. In the end the answer has to be somewhere in the middle but there are so few out there who are qualified to teach and who have walked both sides of the street. And this IMO is the real problem with some of these arts.. You just don't come across a whole lot of fighting CMA, if more folks did fight the art would have a better shot at staying, er, getting on, the fight map....

[sanjuro_ronin]

Let me just say one little thing, Context is everything.

[t_niehoff]

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You assume I'm speaking from theory. Did I ever mention to you one of my sparring partners has 30 years in Japanese Jujitsu? Go ahead, make your assumptions. You like to resort to your convenient strawmen approachs. Who said chi sao has no limitations? Duh. Another strawman assumption on your part as to how I view it. Do you think everyone that disagrees with you just does chi sao all day, if at all? If we think chi sao is usefull, then we obviously don't spar, do nothing live, etc. etc. Very amateur.


The mere fact that you believe having a sparring partner with 30 years in TJJ is a plus reveals your lack of experience. Sparring in and of itself won't develop good skills --its quality sparring, the level or your opponents that you spar with, that makes all the difference. You are only as good as your sparring partners. Lots of WCK people do tons of chi sao, a little sparring among themselves, and believe their "training" is swell. Well, godown to a good MMA school and spend the next month just sparring. You'll see.



If Orr "gets it," why does he do chi sao? Why teach it or train it? He's teaching something totally useless for tradition's sake???!!!


Chi sao is a traditional drill, and he *teaches* WCK in a more-or-less traditional format (which includes the forms). That's all. But the traditional format does not develop much in the way of fighting skill. And that's why he also uses the more modern training model which comports to the same process of training as all good fighters follow. Do I think he is wrong to do that? No. That is one way of *teaching*. And I think it is the beginning of the shift from the traditional model to the functional model of training -- keeping the traditional elements and adopting the functional ones. I would bet that over time, he'll do what we've done here: phase more and more of the traditional elements out because they really aren't necessary to developing good skill.



This is not about its limitations, its about it's usefullness as a tool. Can you not distinguish? Orr sees it. You don't. I offer you a guy that understands the "process" but disagrees with you. If he did agree with you, he'd discard it. If he wasn't your brother, you'd say his head is up his a$$. Oh, and don't lump yourself in Orr's or KF's category. Orr doesn't mouth off or preach to people and KF at least backs his view with personal evidence. You're just a mouth.


Stop speaking for Alan. You have no idea what he knows or thinks. You are projecting your "reasoning".

Of course it is about limitations -- which pertains to the usefulness of the exercise. If it has huge limitations in terms of developing skill and so has limited usefulness. There are better, less limited ways of teaching the same things.

All my views come from personal experience. If you or anyone want to see evidence of what I do or how I train, pay me a visit. You do the work. Don't expect me to do it for you. Get off your lazy asses.



I mention Orr because he is a perfect example of someone who "gets it" by YOUR definition, yet you still don't respect his opinion. Does sleestack33 also not "get it?" He is exactly on point as far as I'm concerned. So my only view or position on this thread, is not the usefulness of chi sao. (Who really cares). It's just how silly you are, T. But you are doing a great job at revealing that yourself. Carry on. I need to follow Anerlich's suggestions about you.

I respect Alan and all fighters. Do you see Alan posting about how my views are wrong? Do you see Dave posting about how my views are wrong? Alan's student Nick posts here too. Where has he said my views are wrong? As Nick pointed out, chi sao is WCK on training wheels. Exactly. And my point is we don't need training wheels to learn to ride a bike. If anyone wants to use the training wheels, that's fine by me -- as long as they realize that chi sao is training wheels, and that you don't become a good bike rider or come to really understand riding a bike with the training wheels on. How long do you need to practice with the training wheels on? Once you can ride the bike, it is time to take the wheels off and leave them off.

[YungChun]

My views are the correct ones, obviously, otherwise God would have posted, disagreeing with me.. LMAO..

[t_niehoff]

I think the best way to look at people like T and KF is too realize that there is usually an agenda behind what they are saying, otherwise why would they be here if they do not believe in the WC training system? For me, why would I spend time on a TKD forum when I don't believe it is a really effective form of MA for fighting? Why would I waste my time trying to convince them that what they do will usually get them into trouble on the street, unless of course I have an agenda to promote? I don't know what T's and KF agenda is but there is definitely something behind all the BS coming from their keyboards.


You are confusing the fighting method with the training method. The traditional training method used in all TMAs, including WCK, just isn't very effective (doesn't produce good results). I am not saying that WCK can't be a good martial art. I'm saying that it will only be as good as your training. And your training is only as good as your training method.

You are one of those people who repeat the old, tired nonsense about WCK being a superior martial art. Whether it is or isn't (or whether that issue is irrelevant) is secondary. What is primary is how you train. The process of training that you use. Because good stuff trained poorly will still produce poor results. WCK, like all TMAs, has a lousy traditional training method which produces lousy results. If people can't -- or won't -- see the problem, they can't make the changes necessary to solve the problem.

Instead of looking at it from a WK perspective, look at it from an objective perspective. Ask yourself: what process do all proven good fighters go through, what process do they all share. Because it is that commonality that is at the root of their skill level.

What is my agenda? I'm not coming here with an agenda anymore than you. I come to this forum informed with my own views formed from my own experience. And I share those views. But it is the same as if I went to the aikido forum and told them that their learning/training method just wasn't very good -- and that they could see that for themselves if they fought with good fighters and tried to use their techniques. Or point out that aikido hasn't produced anyone with any decent fighting skills that didn't go on to train with the modern training methods.

I'd encounter the same resistance. That resistance comes from those people who have been brainwashed by the traditional mindset and by their pursuit of false images -- which prevents people from seeing things as they really are. I'd encounter Victor's and Nerlich's aikido counter-parts! I'd encounter the people who would say "put up a video of you doing aikido" as though that had anything to do with the soundness of my view(I don't even do aikido and can say that their training doesn't work). I'd encounter people like you who would talk about the correctness of aikido's "concepts" like that mattered (it's besides the point: the concept won't work if it isn't properly trained).

Do I have an agenda? No. I just don't like bullsh1t.



Another thing to realize is either you have faith in what you are doing or you don't. For me I do, and I also have faith and trust in the people that I am involved with, that they know what they are talking about and for the simple fact that they have been down the road before.


A person can have"faith"in something -- that doesn't make it work, make it goood, etc. Faith is part of the traditional mindset. "Trust me". "Have faith I know what I'm taking about." Don't have faith in anything; instead use critical thinking skills. Don't take people's word for it; demand proof. Don't rely on theory; seek experience.



I realized a long time ago that there are a multitude of ways to fight, all of them effective in their own right, but what keeps me coming back to Wing Chun was the fact that when learned correctly and applied naturally it is beauty in motion, effectiveness in action, but not hell on the body. I've seen people in this art that weren't all around athletes, training like a mad man, make it work (including myself). Can they/I fight against the pro MMA/train like mad people of the world, probably not, but that is neither the goal nor the intention.


When you say "make it work" -- make what work and against whom (what level of skill)? I'd bet you that if you showed us what you train to do (the drills you do, the techniques you practice) and then showed us your sparring, we'd see that you couldn't make most of what you train work. And that you couldn't make hardly anything work against good people. That's because you only learn to fight and develop fighting skill by fighting/sparring. So regardless of your "art", you will need to do a lot of sparring against good people to develop good skills. Fighting/sparring is "hell on the body." No "hell on the body", no skill. The more "hell on the body", the greater the skill. That's why, btw, conditioning is #1.

[gabe]

The mere fact that you believe having a sparring partner with 30 years in TJJ is a plus reveals your lack of experience. Sparring in and of itself won't develop good skills --its quality sparring, the level or your opponents that you spar with, that makes all the difference. You are only as good as your sparring partners. Lots of WCK people do tons of chi sao, a little sparring among themselves, and believe their "training" is swell. Well, godown to a good MMA school and spend the next month just sparring. You'll see.



Chi sao is a traditional drill, and he *teaches* WCK in a more-or-less traditional format (which includes the forms). That's all. But the traditional format does not develop much in the way of fighting skill. And that's why he also uses the more modern training model which comports to the same process of training as all good fighters follow. Do I think he is wrong to do that? No. That is one way of *teaching*. And I think it is the beginning of the shift from the traditional model to the functional model of training -- keeping the traditional elements and adopting the functional ones. I would bet that over time, he'll do what we've done here: phase more and more of the traditional elements out because they really aren't necessary to developing good skill.



Stop speaking for Alan. You have no idea what he knows or thinks. You are projecting your "reasoning".

Of course it is about limitations -- which pertains to the usefulness of the exercise. If it has huge limitations in terms of developing skill and so has limited usefulness. There are better, less limited ways of teaching the same things.

All my views come from personal experience. If you or anyone want to see evidence of what I do or how I train, pay me a visit. You do the work. Don't expect me to do it for you. Get off your lazy asses.



I respect Alan and all fighters. Do you see Alan posting about how my views are wrong? Do you see Dave posting about how my views are wrong? Alan's student Nick posts here too. Where has he said my views are wrong? As Nick pointed out, chi sao is WCK on training wheels. Exactly. And my point is we don't need training wheels to learn to ride a bike. If anyone wants to use the training wheels, that's fine by me -- as long as they realize that chi sao is training wheels, and that you don't become a good bike rider or come to really understand riding a bike with the training wheels on. How long do you need to practice with the training wheels on? Once you can ride the bike, it is time to take the wheels off and leave them off.

LOL. I'll try to keep this simple for you.

1. How do you judge the type of sparring I do? How do you know what type of fighter the friend I have is, other than labeling him a strawman TJJ. No basis. Nobody that knows him describes him as average. But he's not the issue, it's your judgement of him when you have no basis that is the issue- it shows your amateur thinking. Thanks also for the abundantly nauseatingly obvious lecture on why the quality of sparring matters. :eek:
2. If anyone is trying to speak for Orr, it's you. He teaches and trains chi sao. Is it a stretch to think he has reasons for doing so, other than because it's traditional? If that is the only reason he does it, that's sad. Of course, they aren't going to speak out on you, you're supposed to be friends. But I'd guess they must be thinking, who is T to get on the soapbox...
3. My old boxing coach spoke of shadow boxing as if it were training wheels. Yet everyone from beginners to the most advanced had to do it. And no, it wasn't all freestyle.
4.Now you are starting to waiver. First you said chi sao has no applicability to fighting. Now you say it has value in learning. Gee, learning what? If there is no applicability to fighting, how does it help in learning it.:confused:

Really, answering you posts are really a waste. Your analytical skills are too poor. All of it is based on strawman context. You really shouldn't go to one of those get togethers. If you wind up sparring a TMAist and he wipes your a$$, are you going to go back to your theoretical strawman arguments? Did KF really own Rashun? Did they do enough to show that, win or lose, he may have a very difficult time with Rashun? That maybe your theoretical world is much different than reality? People with experience, that step outside the little box you stay in, don't speak of fighting in black and white like you do. If you opened your door, and most of us who have been around long enough have, you just might meet a person right off the street, never spent a day working the Terence process, who cleans your clock.

[YungChun]

Terence..

Some of the things ChiSao allows us to do is to teach/train the techniques/tactics/concepts/mechanics, whatever you would like to call these things, with modularity, continuity, energy via contact and flow. That is, learning/training how to CHANGE from one WCK "sticking/control/attack" move to another based on the energy feedback <resistance> from the partner.

The contact/sticking drilling, we know as ChiSao, makes it possible to train this flow, changing, energy issuing, energy reception/redirection, tool usage, etc, in an all in one format. This format allows us to break things down into parts to focus on, as well as the option to add parts together or offer completely random responses with varying resistance up to full resistance.

Through this training toolset, ChiSao, teachers can provide/generate energy and positional input at will for the student and thereby drill the student via toi ma. This way the student learns how to keep his position/balance and center while being fed violently changing and forceful energy; He learns how to apply techniques, and many other things through a tactile training interface with the teacher, and others, through, ChiSao.

Now, you seem to think this process is flawed.. Okay.

So why not tell us EXACTLY how YOU would like to see these ATTRIBUTES trained/taught, and in what manner you see as "improved" that allows for the modularity, selectivity, continuity and flow—that allows for learning the changes, continuity and adaptation to energy in order to control the center and our position, as is done in ChiSao via bridge contact.

Explain the training method in detail please so it can be compared to the content and progression used in ChiSao..

[YungChun]

Just a qualification..



Or point out that aikido hasn't produced anyone with any decent fighting skills that didn't go on to train with the modern training methods.

Aiki is a little different, it’s like the un-cola of martial arts..

I don't think Aikidoka actually purport to fight at all..

In their case you have guys like Segal talking about the need for ‘realistic attack’ by the Tori, in training… His group trains pretty hard..but how to evaluate such an art in these terms, or can it be...?

[TenTigers]

ok, just to clarify things in my little head, Terrance-how long have you been training in Wing Chun?

[couch]

James, i think its more like going to a TKD forum and stating that kicking is an important part of fighting, then when they state they put great emphasis on kicking then you assume and say they dont kick or practice right.

Then when you say how to kick right (totally your opinion) they reply by describing the similarities between what they do and your explanation of 'correct kicking', only to have you continue to pipe on about how they are non fighting theory lovers. At which time you copy and paste your post in every thread.... LOL

:p :o

DREW

I tried to read this post and it was a serious mind-f. Which is what all this bantering about whether WCK works or not vs. T.

I don't know how you got the gist of the arguments into your post, but you did it!

Congrats,
Kenton Sefcik

[Knifefighter]

LOL @ everyone getting so defensive that they have to resort to personal attacks.



Shall we listen to the waterboy/cheerleader or the guy that gets out on the field?:D

And funny to watch you insult Orr on his intelligence with regard to fighting and training. Is Orr a mindless teacher worshipping close minded stick to tradition practitioner? If he states that chi sao helps him with x, y and z, you have no basis or standing to say otherwise. Neither can KF. If neither of you practise it or make no attempts to use it, you have no ability to judge its value. You can try to reduce the analysis to some silly black and white logic, but that only shows your amateur level thinking.

I'm sure Alan is a good fighter. However, as far as being waterbody, I probably have three or four times the number of full contact fights that he does.

As far as doing chi sao, and thinking it helps you with fighting... been there done that back in the 80's when I was fighting full contact kickboxing matches.



"When he worked out with my student, Rahsun, and during the conversations we had that day - he said NUMEROUS times that 'I didn't know wing chun did/had this'...'I didn't know wing chun did/had that'...etc.

I don't know if you are twisting Phil's words again, but either you are mistaken at what he said, he is mistaken at what I said, or you are lying or he is lying.


I think the best way to look at people like T and KF is too realize that there is usually an agenda behind what they are saying, otherwise why would they be here if they do not believe in the WC training system? For me, why would I spend time on a TKD forum when I don't believe it is a really effective form of MA for fighting? Why would I waste my time trying to convince them that what they do will usually get them into trouble on the street, unless of course I have an agenda to promote? I don't know what T's and KF agenda is but there is definitely something behind all the BS coming from their keyboards.

I do this instead of watching television. I don't have an agenda, other than working on my typing speed. I just pass through here, read some posts and give my opinions.

The long and the short of it is I don't really care one way or another how other people train. To tell you the truth, it would be in my interest if more people trained in what I consider to be ineffective methods.


But he is an expert at name calling--I just wonder now if the "kinder,gentler KF" is is actually worried somebody might Go and see him since we have found that the Internet and keyboard is no shield anymore

Anybody is welcome to come see me if it is important to them.

[sihing]

You are confusing the fighting method with the training method. The traditional training method used in all TMAs, including WCK, just isn't very effective (doesn't produce good results). I am not saying that WCK can't be a good martial art. I'm saying that it will only be as good as your training. And your training is only as good as your training method.

You are one of those people who repeat the old, tired nonsense about WCK being a superior martial art. Whether it is or isn't (or whether that issue is irrelevant) is secondary. What is primary is how you train. The process of training that you use. Because good stuff trained poorly will still produce poor results. WCK, like all TMAs, has a lousy traditional training method which produces lousy results. If people can't -- or won't -- see the problem, they can't make the changes necessary to solve the problem.

Instead of looking at it from a WK perspective, look at it from an objective perspective. Ask yourself: what process do all proven good fighters go through, what process do they all share. Because it is that commonality that is at the root of their skill level.

What is my agenda? I'm not coming here with an agenda anymore than you. I come to this forum informed with my own views formed from my own experience. And I share those views. But it is the same as if I went to the aikido forum and told them that their learning/training method just wasn't very good -- and that they could see that for themselves if they fought with good fighters and tried to use their techniques. Or point out that aikido hasn't produced anyone with any decent fighting skills that didn't go on to train with the modern training methods.

I'd encounter the same resistance. That resistance comes from those people who have been brainwashed by the traditional mindset and by their pursuit of false images -- which prevents people from seeing things as they really are. I'd encounter Victor's and Nerlich's aikido counter-parts! I'd encounter the people who would say "put up a video of you doing aikido" as though that had anything to do with the soundness of my view(I don't even do aikido and can say that their training doesn't work). I'd encounter people like you who would talk about the correctness of aikido's "concepts" like that mattered (it's besides the point: the concept won't work if it isn't properly trained).

Do I have an agenda? No. I just don't like bullsh1t.



A person can have"faith"in something -- that doesn't make it work, make it goood, etc. Faith is part of the traditional mindset. "Trust me". "Have faith I know what I'm taking about." Don't have faith in anything; instead use critical thinking skills. Don't take people's word for it; demand proof. Don't rely on theory; seek experience.



When you say "make it work" -- make what work and against whom (what level of skill)? I'd bet you that if you showed us what you train to do (the drills you do, the techniques you practice) and then showed us your sparring, we'd see that you couldn't make most of what you train work. And that you couldn't make hardly anything work against good people. That's because you only learn to fight and develop fighting skill by fighting/sparring. So regardless of your "art", you will need to do a lot of sparring against good people to develop good skills. Fighting/sparring is "hell on the body." No "hell on the body", no skill. The more "hell on the body", the greater the skill. That's why, btw, conditioning is #1.

First of all, how the hell does one use the multi quote function on this thing, lol..

This is going to be a bit scattered but here goes:)

I agree, in the end how you train it makes all the difference

I believe there are some arts that teach effective things, and some arts that teach non effective things. IMO WC teaches effective things. But it is still up to the individual to make it work (this is where the various factors of how you train, who you train with, who you are learning from come into play). You can have the most effective weapon in the world at your disposal, but if you can't use it then what do you have?

T, ask yourself, can you maintain the intensity of training like a proven fighter over a long period of time. Can you overcome injuries in training to maintain the effectiveness of your tools, all the while living a normal life and enjoying the process? Why look at proven fighters, when you and I are not them? Nor could we ever be at this stage in our lives. Yeah, if I was only concerned with pure fighting effectiveness I would be supplementing my training by going down to the local MMA gym and training a ton with them, but that is not the goal, to be the "Ultimate Fighter", the goal is to obtain sustainable real skills that work on the street when needed, and enjoy the process in the meantime, without having to worry about a broken nose, stubbed toe, sprained ankle or torn muscle. I already know that I'm not a great fighter, it is just not a part of my personality or intention. I really have a hard time making hard contact on the guys in the gym simply for the fact that I don't want to hurt them in the slightest.

My agenda here is to share and maybe make a friend or two, not to change peoples minds and step on their toes like you do in every post:) It's fine to share your views, and disagree with this and that, but to do it a few dozen time a week repeating it in everypost is just ridiculous. It's obvious to me that you are passionate about what you believe, that is good as most people lack passion in their lives, but you have taken it to the extreme. We get your point T, quit playing the broken record.

T your reality is different from mine, and alot of people that populate this place. The simple fact is you judge people steady but are unwilling to be judged yourself. You constantly call people names and proclaim them as lousy fighters, giving the impression that you know and can do so much more, but when someone calls you on it you say you suck and are no authority. Do you ever read what you write? For me, I am not an authority, nor a good fighter, I just teach VT the best I can, while still learning more in the process. No claims, no judgements.

You must really hate it, but it still looks like a agenda to me:)

I think your confusing what I said as "bling faith", which to me means belief without proof. I don't have to justify my personal experience to anyone here, but I will say that the reason I believe what I do is through actual experience, not just from what someone has said. I've felt it, seen it, and done it to others, to me that is enough proof.

Making it work is pretty self explainitory, what they couldn't do before they can do now through the help of VT training. Whether or not the opponents they use it against are world class or not is besides the point, before the VT training they couldn't do it, now with it they can. It doesn't mean they are world class fighters, it just means they fight better due to the training. For me and the students I teach, right now we do little non contact sparring (that is changing soon), simply due to the fact that I want them to have established basics within their systems. If they can't demonstrate the structure and body engine within the chi sau and drills, they won't show it in sparring, but they are showing more improvement all the time, that's why the sparring is happening soon:)

I believe as well that fighting/sparring is hell on the body and that it is required to develop the skills to a high level, but if that is true, how much of that can you take? And why? How often are you using your skills in the real world. Why beat your body up on a constant basis for a situation that may never happen or could be avoided by other means such as being non confrontational and portraying yourself as a non victim? I haven't even had the chance to use what I've learned in the last 7 pr 8 years, call me lucky:)

James

[sihing]

I do this instead of watching television. I don't have an agenda, other than working on my typing speed. I just pass through here, read some posts and give my opinions.

The long and the short of it is I don't really care one way or another how other people train. To tell you the truth, it would be in my interest if more people trained in what I consider to be ineffective methods.


Fair enough. I do the same while trying to learn something and make a friend or two:)

James

[YungChun]

I believe as well that fighting/sparring is hell on the body and that it is required to develop the skills to a high level, but if that is true, how much of that can you take? And why? How often are you using your skills in the real world. Why beat your body up on a constant basis for a situation that may never happen or could be avoided by other means such as being non confrontational and portraying yourself as a non victim? I haven't even had the chance to use what I've learned in the last 7 pr 8 years, call me lucky:)
It depends on what you want to get out of it..

Sparring is not really that hard on the body.. The biggest problem is headshots.. The body, if you are conditioned properly should/can take lots of punishment without any real damage, especially with a little gear. For head shots the neck muscles learn to help reduce shock transfer, you learn to keep your head angled down, and actually move it, etc, but you can also use some quality head gear which helps. For gloves I think NHB gloves are the best so using WCK hand movements, grabs and other tools is possible..

The sparring should be structured—work on specific stuff, like in ChiSao you are often working on getting better at certain things . For safety use fixed round times; stop the fight if one guy has turtled; people don't need to be pounding the crap out of each other beyond what is instructive. You don't need to go full contact every time, to all parts of the body, head, joints, with finishing shots .etc... Sparring isn't really about trying to kill your sparring partner, you adjust just like you do in ChiSao.

But WCK/WCK sparring is also very limited. IMO WCK guys need to go out and spar with NON WCK.. Most folks DO NOT fight like WCK and so WCK/WCK sparring can get very 'inbred'.

And don’t forget you can do other things with your sparring like scenario training, etc. As with anything you just start slow and light and just keep taking it up a notch as you can and desire...

As you get older sparring does get more dangerous.. That's why you should get in as much as you can when you are young.

[t_niehoff]

Terence..

Some of the things ChiSao allows us to do is to teach/train the techniques/tactics/concepts/mechanics, whatever you would like to call these things, with modularity, continuity, energy via contact and flow. That is, learning/training how to CHANGE from one WCK "sticking/control/attack" move to another based on the energy feedback <resistance> from the partner.


I agree that you can use the exercise chi sao to learn to physically perform certain contact skills -- techniques, tools, etc. It will also introduce you to "flowing", the ability to change/adapt your movement/technique to the moment based on what your partner is giving you. However, those tools and that"flow" are not taking place in a fighting environment but an artificial one, an environement where unrealistic energy (power/forces), unrealistic movment, etc. are required to continue the exercise (so that a fight doesn't break out!). So the usage of the tools and the flow is artificial, it is not realistic, it won't "work" like that in fighting. So you are using your tools and flowing in ways that don't correspond to reality. This is easy to see by just doing contact fighting against nonWCK people: it won't look or feel anything like chi sao.



The contact/sticking drilling, we know as ChiSao, makes it possible to train this flow, changing, energy issuing, energy reception/redirection, tool usage, etc, in an all in one format. This format allows us to break things down into parts to focus on, as well as the option to add parts together or offer completely random responses with varying resistance up to full resistance.


Yes, the drill does permit us to learn and practice various, limited skills all in one format. But that format is not realistic. It doesn't just have to do with the level of resistance -- doing the game patty-cake at high levels of resistance won't translate into fighting skills.

What training for better fighting skills is all about is practicing solving genuine fighting problems -- things you will really encounter as you will encounter them. Chi sao does not provide genuine fighting problems because people doing chi sao aren't behaving like they really will or doing the things they really will in fighting. All you get from chi sao are chi sao problems. And they are unrealsitic and don't correspond to genuine fighting problems.

This can be easily seen by just starting from a contact position and fighting -- get an opponent who isn't a WCK guy (so he won't be programmed), start in bridge contact, and really fight. Anyone who does this will see that it looks, feels, etc. nothing like chi sao. And they'll see that they will have real difficulty making any of their techniques/movements/concepts work -- and that's because they have never used those tools to really solve combative problems (only chi sao problems). The only way to learn how to solve those combative problems is to face them, a lot, to then figure out for yourself how to deal with them, and then practice dealing with them a lot. This is what all fighters, from boxers to BJJ people, do.



Through this training toolset, ChiSao, teachers can provide/generate energy and positional input at will for the student and thereby drill the student via toi ma. This way the student learns how to keep his position/balance and center while being fed violently changing and forceful energy; He learns how to apply techniques, and many other things through a tactile training interface with the teacher, and others, through, ChiSao.

Now, you seem to think this process is flawed.. Okay.


I agree with you that in chi sao you use the tools of WCK to play that game, and learn to use the tools to play that game. The point I'm making is that the game of chi sao is not the game of fighting, that they are very, very different games with not much in the way of overlap. Same tools, different games. One unrealistic, one realistic. It is not just a matter of learning the tools, but learning how to play the game-- how to use those tools in that game. You can't use the WCK tools in fighting as you doin chi sao -- that won't work. And you can see it for yourself by just doing a bit of contact fighting. If you want to learn how to use the tools of WCK to play the game of fighting, you can only do that by fighting.



So why not tell us EXACTLY how YOU would like to see these ATTRIBUTES trained/taught, and in what manner you see as "improved" that allows for the modularity, selectivity, continuity and flow—that allows for learning the changes, continuity and adaptation to energy in order to control the center and our position, as is done in ChiSao via bridge contact.

Explain the training method in detail please so it can be compared to the content and progression used in ChiSao..

Those attributes are game-specific. You are learning to flow, continuity, selectivity, etc. in an unrealistic environemnt, when confronted with unrealsitic situations, unrealsitic energy, unrealistic responses, etc. You are not learning them in a realsitic situation. Your not facing genuine combative problems. And the more you practice unrealsitic things, the more you habituate them -- so that they become second nature. This is poor training. Not only are you never learning to respond to realsitic combative problems, you are habituating your body to act in unrealistic ways. That's a recipe for failure.

Chi sao is, at best, step 1. It is a platform that will permit you to unrealsitically practice the WCK tools. But no matter how long you practice chi sao, how good you get at the drill, how much resistance you put into it, you are still at step 1. The beginner step. Step 2 is putting those tools into a realistic environment. Only in that way can they become realistic skills. A realsitic environment is a fighting/sparring environment (an "alive" environment). Your fighting skill level will correspond to how much time you've spent doing step 2 (and with what level of opponent) -- not to how much time you've spent in step 1. Step 2 is the practitioner's step; at that point you are *doing* WCK, practicing WCK as it will really be applied.

WCK, like most TMAs, is grounded in the idea that you can develop fighting skills without fighting. You can't. You can learn the skills without fighting, but you can never really develop them beyond a superficial level, hone them into fighting skills, without fighting. Fighting/sparring is what develops your fighting skill. Period. Chi sao is not fighting. Ergo, it won't produce good fighting skills. Once you see that -- fighting skill only comes from fighting (just like you learn and get better at riding a bike by riding the bike) -- and accept it, you can begin to see all this stuff for what it really is.

If you come to really see this, then you won't need me to explain how to train contact fighting to you. If you see it, you will know the answer. How do you become a good boxer? A good wreslter? A good WCK fighter? A good BJJ fighter? The same process.

[TenTigers]

yes, but how much have you actually trained in WCK?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Here, check this out and then compare it to some of his more recent posts about wing chun ineffectiveness, chi sao as an artificial training method, etc. Yet if you asked Rahsun (Phil's student) about how much chi sao has contributed to his overall wing chun fighting skills - he would tell you that it has contributed immensely.


http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42636&highlight=Props+Phil+Redomond

[YungChun]

Terence..

Without that 'base training' *done correctly* students would never learn how to take/occupy--fight for the center/CG with WCK tools, tactics and energy via feeling...

And a hundred other sub-components and attributes that are seeded and sown in that specialized learning environment.. Suggesting that a student with no WCK training need only cross arms with Joe the boxer and FIGHT to 'grow' the same attributes/tools/skills is just goofy.

Yes, at some point folks do need to FIGHT to gain real skill but before the fruit can be harvested the seed must be planted, nourished and grown, otherwise you're just eating seeds... :)

That simple really...

[YungChun]

Here, check this out and then compare it to some of his more recent posts about wing chun ineffectiveness, chi sao as an artificial training method, etc. Yet if you asked Rahsun (Phil's student) about how much chi sao has contributed to his overall wing chun fighting skills - he would tell you that it has contributed immensely.
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42636&highlight=Props+Phil+Redomond

So it would seem Terence isn't the only one doing some flip/flopping around the board... :rolleyes:

[southernkf]

Hi Terence,

This thread has been difficult to follow with all the different discussions going on. I have a question based on my take of several earlier discussions. Like I said before, I agree with many of your premises. I assume you practice what your saying on line. How has your training differed from when you were doing more traditional wing chun, assuming you ever did a more traditional wing chun? What benifits how you noticed and how have they improved you? How have you tested the improvments? Is it that you see differences when working with classmates? Are you able to perform better against different folks?

[Knifefighter]

Here, check this out and then compare it to some of his more recent posts about wing chun ineffectiveness, chi sao as an artificial training method, etc. Yet if you asked Rahsun (Phil's student) about how much chi sao has contributed to his overall wing chun fighting skills - he would tell you that it has contributed immensely.


http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42636&highlight=Props+Phil+Redomond


Like I said, I liked what I saw them doing... which was testing and trying stuff out against others from the outside.

I cannot comment, nor was I commenting, on his fighting skills or lack thereof, since we did not do any contact fighting, nor did I witness any contact fighting that day. IMO, whatever skills Rashun has are there in spite of his chi sao training (as you have commented yourself, he is a naturally skilled athlete), not because of it.

[TenTigers]

ok, this is what I'm seeing-I;m seeing people making decisions based on insufficient knowledge. It seems to me that they think WCK people practice chi-sao and then try to use it right then in fighting. There are stages leading up to fighting with WCK-after chi-sao, such as gor-sao, or live drilling. Partners square off and attack and defend. Sometimes there are pre-arranged techniques-what if situations,reaction drills, which eventually lead to freestyle. This is why when you look at it, you find yuorself going,"I don't see the chi-sao" well, of course not. It seems that there are WCK people who know this, but haven't really mentioned it, so the argument goes back and forth.
This is why I asked terrance how long he'd been studying Wing Chun, if at all.
Sometimes you can be with a teacher for years, and not see this training. This is not the syle's fault, but the way that some people teach it.

[Knifefighter]

This is why when you look at it, you find yuorself going,"I don't see the chi-sao" well, of course not.

When I watch a wrestling match, I see the same things done in the match as were done in practice... same with BJJ... same with tennis... same with basketball... same with any human performance activity done at the higher levels.

[Matrix]

IMO, the day you are waiting for came and went a long time ago.I guess I missed it. :)

[anerlich]

Or point out that aikido hasn't produced anyone with any decent fighting skills that didn't go on to train with the modern training methods.

That's true of any art. Duh!

"Angry white pyjamas" (book) describes the aikido training undergone by the Tokyo police riot squads. Not a lot of clueless theoreticians there. Good read, funny in parts.

KF, I think the waterboy comment was (appropriately) directed at T, not you.

[Ultimatewingchun]

ok, this is what I'm seeing-I;m seeing people making decisions based on insufficient knowledge. It seems to me that they think WCK people practice chi-sao and then try to use it right then in fighting. There are stages leading up to fighting with WCK-after chi-sao, such as gor-sao, or live drilling. Partners square off and attack and defend. Sometimes there are pre-arranged techniques-what if situations,reaction drills, which eventually lead to freestyle. This is why when you look at it, you find yuorself going,"I don't see the chi-sao" well, of course not. It seems that there are WCK people who know this, but haven't really mentioned it, so the argument goes back and forth.
This is why I asked terrance how long he'd been studying Wing Chun, if at all.
Sometimes you can be with a teacher for years, and not see this training. This is not the syle's fault, but the way that some people teach it.


***EXCELLENT POST, Ten Tigers...

and I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that a guy like Dale HAS NEVER SEEN/EXPERIENCED any high quality wing chun training progressions the likes of which you described - ever. As for Terence, he may or may not have had any such quality training (he's been very slippery here in the past when asked about how much time he's actually spent training wing chun with Robert Chu)...

and even more hazy as to exactly what he may have learned from Robert - including training methods. And that fact - in addition to the fact that Mr. "I know what's happenin and you don't know 5hit" has never shown up in person or posted anything for anyone to see...

all adds up to the large doses of SCEPTICISM that both of these guys now receive - and deservedly so.

I mean, quite frankly, I can't take anything either one of them say about wing chun seriously at this point. And that, coupled with their relentless attempts to troll, degrade, and undermine wing chun, wing chun training methods - and wing chun people...

has led to my IGNORE list.

[Knifefighter]

This post cannot be seen because Ultimatewingchun posts nothing but the same old drivel and is on your ignore list.

Did you say something? :)

[t_niehoff]

I agree, in the end how you train it makes all the difference


That's the key -- how you train. If you come to understand that fighting skill only comes from fighting, everything will begin to fall into place. But aslong as people continue to believe that they can develop good fighting skill by not fighting, they will forever suck.



I believe there are some arts that teach effective things, and some arts that teach non effective things. IMO WC teaches effective things. But it is still up to the individual to make it work . . .

I agree that WCK can be effective. Just as boxing or wrestling can be effective. But these things don't work in and of themselves. Much of what I see in WCK is ineffective -- it just won'twork in fighting. Yet, people continue to fob it off as"top drawer." Quite frankly, no one can talk about what is or is not effective except from experience.



T, ask yourself, can you maintain the intensity of training like a proven fighter over a long period of time. Can you overcome injuries in training to maintain the effectiveness of your tools, all the while living a normal life and enjoying the process? . . . I really have a hard time making hard contact on the guys in the gym simply for the fact that I don't want to hurt them in the slightest.


Of course you can. People continue to do athletics throughout their lives. But you need to understand the reality of WCK or any fighting method -- they are contact"sports" (athletic activities) and inherent in any contact sport/activity is the risk of injury. These can be minimized of course, but the risk comes with the activity. Imagine someone saying they wanted to play rugby but they didn't want to risk a stubbed toe or sprained ankle or black eye. Sorry, but they are all part of rugby. You can't do rugby and not at some point get injured. Fighting skill comes only from sparring/fighting so anyone who doesn't want to go through that process should accept that they will never develop much in the way of skill. That is just the way it is. It doesn't change because we'd like it to.

The other part - about not liking to make hard contact - is that this is something I've seen before. Lots of nice people are inhibited in that way. This needs to be trained out of you by a good trainer. A good part of training to be a fighter is mental, and it takes a certain mentality to be a fighter. That, like everything else, needs to be trained.



My agenda here is to share and maybe make a friend or two, not to change peoples minds and step on their toes like you do in every post:) . . . .

I understand your POV, and it is a rather common one. The problem is, however, what can someone who doesn't really practice WCK -- like someone who doesn't really box or really wrestle -- share? Certainly nothing about application because that comes from experience fighting. Certainly nothing about how to train effectively because without reference to results (fighting) you can't know how well the training works. So if you can't share about applying WCK or training WCK, what can you share? Hearysay, concepts, theories, forms, etc. You are sharing your views of WCK as a nonmartial art.



T your reality is different from mine, and alot of people that populate this place. The simple fact is you judge people steady but are unwilling to be judged yourself. You constantly call people names and proclaim them as lousy fighters, giving the impression that you know and can do so much more, but when someone calls you on it you say you suck and are no authority. . . .

Reality is reality,just as the truth is the truth. You say I "judge" people by calling them lousy fighters -- well, isn't that the truth? How can they be good fighters without sparring/fightign a lot against good fighters? Are they doing that? No. QED. And if someone doesn't fight and isn't a good fighter, how the hell do they think they can teach others to develop fighting skills? Would you go to someone who never boxed in their life to teach you to be a good boxer? Maybe they would be teaching boxing "the best they could" but they would be terrible coaches.

I don't make claims about myself or my skill -- because my views don't depend on my skill level. Just as my views of how aikido is poorly trained doesn't depend on my aikido skill level. All anyone needs to do is see how genuine good fighters train and stop buying into the nonsense the traditional guys sell to realize that fighting skill comes only from fighting. Period. Everything else is just prep work. The truth of that does not depend on my skill level.

Does this rub lots of people the wrong way? You bet it does. Because if you accept that fighting (WCK) skill comes only from fighting, the ramifications are staggering. What does it say about the skill of thegrandmasters? The skill of people who have been doing nothing but forms, chi sao, etc. for 20 years? The ability,and hence knowledge and understanding, of most people in WCK? Exactly. And people have a lot of ego (and perhaps financial) investment in their "status".



Making it work is pretty self explainitory, what they couldn't do before they can do now through the help of VT training. Whether or not the opponents they use it against are world class or not is besides the point, before the VT training they couldn't do it, now with it they can. It doesn't mean they are world class fighters, it just means they fight better due to the training. For me and the students I teach, right now we do little non contact sparring (that is changing soon), simply due to the fact that I want them to have established basics within their systems. If they can't demonstrate the structure and body engine within the chi sau and drills, they won't show it in sparring, but they are showing more improvement all the time, that's why the sparring is happening soon:)


Yes, if they can't do the movement, technique or whatever in an unrealistic drill they won't be able to do it under realistic conditions. But you don't take the next step: practice in an unrealistic drill will never develop realistic skills. Never. AT elast not beyond a superficial level. So do all the forms and unrealsitic drills you want, and you never even begin to develop real martial skill. The "improvement" you see is "improvement" (which may not be moving in the right direction toward what will work in realistic conditions) in an unrealsitic environment. Getting "better" at forms and chi sao saysnothing about fighting skill. And if you are practicing a martial art to develop fighting skill(if not, why practice one), then all your "improvement" is an illusion.



I believe as well that fighting/sparring is hell on the body and that it is required to develop the skills to a high level, but if that is true, how much of that can you take? And why? How often are you using your skills in the real world. Why beat your body up on a constant basis for a situation that may never happen or could be avoided by other means such as being non confrontational and portraying yourself as a non victim? I haven't even had the chance to use what I've learned in the last 7 pr 8 years, call me lucky:)

James

Fightign/sparring isn't just neededto develop skills to a high level, but to any significant level. You learn to box by boxing; you learn to use WCK by really using (in fighting) WCK. How good you are will correspond to the amount of quality sparring you've done. It's not how well you do the forms or chi sao -- it is the amount of quality sparring you've done that is determinative. Period. A typical blue belt in BJJ has sparred several hundreds of hours minimum. And that's just to get beyond white belt level! How many WCK people have put in that blue belt level of time?

You do bring up a good point though -- you demonstrate the problem with practicing a martial art for self-defense: it just isn't worth the effort. Putting in hundreds or thousands of hours of sparring to develop good skillsfor the unlikely event of needing to defend yourself "on the street." In my view, it is a really bad idea to take up boxing or wrestling or BJJ or judo or WCK *merely* to learn to defend themselves (though that is a by-product) - but should only take up those practices because they like playing that game. They like boxing, they like wrestling, they like grappling, etc. In other words, they like to fight -- it is a competitive, challenging actiivty/sport. If someone doesn't like playing rugby for itself, they shouldn't really be doing it.

[sihing]

That's the key -- how you train. If you come to understand that fighting skill only comes from fighting, everything will begin to fall into place. But aslong as people continue to believe that they can develop good fighting skill by not fighting, they will forever suck.



I agree that WCK can be effective. Just as boxing or wrestling can be effective. But these things don't work in and of themselves. Much of what I see in WCK is ineffective -- it just won'twork in fighting. Yet, people continue to fob it off as"top drawer." Quite frankly, no one can talk about what is or is not effective except from experience.



Of course you can. People continue to do athletics throughout their lives. But you need to understand the reality of WCK or any fighting method -- they are contact"sports" (athletic activities) and inherent in any contact sport/activity is the risk of injury. These can be minimized of course, but the risk comes with the activity. Imagine someone saying they wanted to play rugby but they didn't want to risk a stubbed toe or sprained ankle or black eye. Sorry, but they are all part of rugby. You can't do rugby and not at some point get injured. Fighting skill comes only from sparring/fighting so anyone who doesn't want to go through that process should accept that they will never develop much in the way of skill. That is just the way it is. It doesn't change because we'd like it to.

The other part - about not liking to make hard contact - is that this is something I've seen before. Lots of nice people are inhibited in that way. This needs to be trained out of you by a good trainer. A good part of training to be a fighter is mental, and it takes a certain mentality to be a fighter. That, like everything else, needs to be trained.



I understand your POV, and it is a rather common one. The problem is, however, what can someone who doesn't really practice WCK -- like someone who doesn't really box or really wrestle -- share? Certainly nothing about application because that comes from experience fighting. Certainly nothing about how to train effectively because without reference to results (fighting) you can't know how well the training works. So if you can't share about applying WCK or training WCK, what can you share? Hearysay, concepts, theories, forms, etc. You are sharing your views of WCK as a nonmartial art.



Reality is reality,just as the truth is the truth. You say I "judge" people by calling them lousy fighters -- well, isn't that the truth? How can they be good fighters without sparring/fightign a lot against good fighters? Are they doing that? No. QED. And if someone doesn't fight and isn't a good fighter, how the hell do they think they can teach others to develop fighting skills? Would you go to someone who never boxed in their life to teach you to be a good boxer? Maybe they would be teaching boxing "the best they could" but they would be terrible coaches.

I don't make claims about myself or my skill -- because my views don't depend on my skill level. Just as my views of how aikido is poorly trained doesn't depend on my aikido skill level. All anyone needs to do is see how genuine good fighters train and stop buying into the nonsense the traditional guys sell to realize that fighting skill comes only from fighting. Period. Everything else is just prep work. The truth of that does not depend on my skill level.

Does this rub lots of people the wrong way? You bet it does. Because if you accept that fighting (WCK) skill comes only from fighting, the ramifications are staggering. What does it say about the skill of thegrandmasters? The skill of people who have been doing nothing but forms, chi sao, etc. for 20 years? The ability,and hence knowledge and understanding, of most people in WCK? Exactly. And people have a lot of ego (and perhaps financial) investment in their "status".



Yes, if they can't do the movement, technique or whatever in an unrealistic drill they won't be able to do it under realistic conditions. But you don't take the next step: practice in an unrealistic drill will never develop realistic skills. Never. AT elast not beyond a superficial level. So do all the forms and unrealsitic drills you want, and you never even begin to develop real martial skill. The "improvement" you see is "improvement" (which may not be moving in the right direction toward what will work in realistic conditions) in an unrealsitic environment. Getting "better" at forms and chi sao saysnothing about fighting skill. And if you are practicing a martial art to develop fighting skill(if not, why practice one), then all your "improvement" is an illusion.



Fightign/sparring isn't just neededto develop skills to a high level, but to any significant level. You learn to box by boxing; you learn to use WCK by really using (in fighting) WCK. How good you are will correspond to the amount of quality sparring you've done. It's not how well you do the forms or chi sao -- it is the amount of quality sparring you've done that is determinative. Period. A typical blue belt in BJJ has sparred several hundreds of hours minimum. And that's just to get beyond white belt level! How many WCK people have put in that blue belt level of time?

You do bring up a good point though -- you demonstrate the problem with practicing a martial art for self-defense: it just isn't worth the effort. Putting in hundreds or thousands of hours of sparring to develop good skillsfor the unlikely event of needing to defend yourself "on the street." In my view, it is a really bad idea to take up boxing or wrestling or BJJ or judo or WCK *merely* to learn to defend themselves (though that is a by-product) - but should only take up those practices because they like playing that game. They like boxing, they like wrestling, they like grappling, etc. In other words, they like to fight -- it is a competitive, challenging actiivty/sport. If someone doesn't like playing rugby for itself, they shouldn't really be doing it.

This is all fine and dandy but you didn't answer the most important question? How do you use the multi quote function???????:):):)

James

[Knifefighter]

This is all fine and dandy but you didn't answer the most important question? How do you use the multi quote function???????:):):)

James

There is no multiquote. You have to copy and paste each individual quote into your post. It's something you learn at the higher levels of internet chi sao.

[jesper]

heh:)


....... message was to short

[TenTigers]

.....ok, is it me, or is Terrence refusing to answer my question?:confused:

[sihing]

That's the key -- how you train. If you come to understand that fighting skill only comes from fighting, everything will begin to fall into place. But aslong as people continue to believe that they can develop good fighting skill by not fighting, they will forever suck.



I agree that WCK can be effective. Just as boxing or wrestling can be effective. But these things don't work in and of themselves. Much of what I see in WCK is ineffective -- it just won'twork in fighting. Yet, people continue to fob it off as"top drawer." Quite frankly, no one can talk about what is or is not effective except from experience.



Of course you can. People continue to do athletics throughout their lives. But you need to understand the reality of WCK or any fighting method -- they are contact"sports" (athletic activities) and inherent in any contact sport/activity is the risk of injury. These can be minimized of course, but the risk comes with the activity. Imagine someone saying they wanted to play rugby but they didn't want to risk a stubbed toe or sprained ankle or black eye. Sorry, but they are all part of rugby. You can't do rugby and not at some point get injured. Fighting skill comes only from sparring/fighting so anyone who doesn't want to go through that process should accept that they will never develop much in the way of skill. That is just the way it is. It doesn't change because we'd like it to.

The other part - about not liking to make hard contact - is that this is something I've seen before. Lots of nice people are inhibited in that way. This needs to be trained out of you by a good trainer. A good part of training to be a fighter is mental, and it takes a certain mentality to be a fighter. That, like everything else, needs to be trained.



I understand your POV, and it is a rather common one. The problem is, however, what can someone who doesn't really practice WCK -- like someone who doesn't really box or really wrestle -- share? Certainly nothing about application because that comes from experience fighting. Certainly nothing about how to train effectively because without reference to results (fighting) you can't know how well the training works. So if you can't share about applying WCK or training WCK, what can you share? Hearysay, concepts, theories, forms, etc. You are sharing your views of WCK as a nonmartial art.



Reality is reality,just as the truth is the truth. You say I "judge" people by calling them lousy fighters -- well, isn't that the truth? How can they be good fighters without sparring/fightign a lot against good fighters? Are they doing that? No. QED. And if someone doesn't fight and isn't a good fighter, how the hell do they think they can teach others to develop fighting skills? Would you go to someone who never boxed in their life to teach you to be a good boxer? Maybe they would be teaching boxing "the best they could" but they would be terrible coaches.

I don't make claims about myself or my skill -- because my views don't depend on my skill level. Just as my views of how aikido is poorly trained doesn't depend on my aikido skill level. All anyone needs to do is see how genuine good fighters train and stop buying into the nonsense the traditional guys sell to realize that fighting skill comes only from fighting. Period. Everything else is just prep work. The truth of that does not depend on my skill level.

Does this rub lots of people the wrong way? You bet it does. Because if you accept that fighting (WCK) skill comes only from fighting, the ramifications are staggering. What does it say about the skill of thegrandmasters? The skill of people who have been doing nothing but forms, chi sao, etc. for 20 years? The ability,and hence knowledge and understanding, of most people in WCK? Exactly. And people have a lot of ego (and perhaps financial) investment in their "status".



Yes, if they can't do the movement, technique or whatever in an unrealistic drill they won't be able to do it under realistic conditions. But you don't take the next step: practice in an unrealistic drill will never develop realistic skills. Never. AT elast not beyond a superficial level. So do all the forms and unrealsitic drills you want, and you never even begin to develop real martial skill. The "improvement" you see is "improvement" (which may not be moving in the right direction toward what will work in realistic conditions) in an unrealsitic environment. Getting "better" at forms and chi sao saysnothing about fighting skill. And if you are practicing a martial art to develop fighting skill(if not, why practice one), then all your "improvement" is an illusion.



Fightign/sparring isn't just neededto develop skills to a high level, but to any significant level. You learn to box by boxing; you learn to use WCK by really using (in fighting) WCK. How good you are will correspond to the amount of quality sparring you've done. It's not how well you do the forms or chi sao -- it is the amount of quality sparring you've done that is determinative. Period. A typical blue belt in BJJ has sparred several hundreds of hours minimum. And that's just to get beyond white belt level! How many WCK people have put in that blue belt level of time?

You do bring up a good point though -- you demonstrate the problem with practicing a martial art for self-defense: it just isn't worth the effort. Putting in hundreds or thousands of hours of sparring to develop good skillsfor the unlikely event of needing to defend yourself "on the street." In my view, it is a really bad idea to take up boxing or wrestling or BJJ or judo or WCK *merely* to learn to defend themselves (though that is a by-product) - but should only take up those practices because they like playing that game. They like boxing, they like wrestling, they like grappling, etc. In other words, they like to fight -- it is a competitive, challenging actiivty/sport. If someone doesn't like playing rugby for itself, they shouldn't really be doing it.

Okay, on a serious note, some of these things I agree with like that fact that the more time you spend using your tools under while under stress, the better you get, the same can be said for training with people more skilled that you. This is true in all activities which involve direct interaction with another person. I also agree that in and of itself WC cannot do anything to anyone, it is us that puts the tools into action. But an interesting question arises here, and that is does what you practice make a difference. I think so, otherwise you wouldn't need to learn any system or style to fight and there wouldn't be so many choices today to choose from. BJJ and Japanese JJ are two very different things that have similar backgrounds, so it is obvious here that what you do practice does make a difference. It's all in the application and understanding of what you are doing. Some people (like Helio in GJJ) can see things that others can't and from there they develop something new. This is why I always say, not all WC is equal or the same.

Regarding training like proven fighters and maintaining that I have to disagree. If what you say is true, then the champions of old would be the champs of today, since according to you they would have the ability to train hard and overcome injuries while having the wisdom gained from all the years of fighting? As we know that is not the case, as is seen in all sports or athletic activities. Yeah, we can continue to train in those things, but not nearly at the same intensity, and if you’re not doing that are you really fighting? If you can't train at the highest levels of intensity are you really at your best? This is where other things that contribute to fighting come into play, as IMO how fast, strong, conditioned you are not always the deciding factors (in real life situations that is, when there are rules galore than that is a different story). Timing, distance control, the ability to see and recognize weakness/strengths in your opponent, and the calmness and experience to do something about it, none of this has to do with how well your body can perform physically and/or how much punishment your body can take. Now I'm not saying that being in shape is bad, as I believe it can only help you in fighting, to have a body that is finely tuned and ready to pounce is good, but it is only part of the equation. If the skills/experience/composure is not there to deliver the tools, then what do you have? Nothing. The best fighters are the ones that can deliver four things in one motion as Sifu Lam says, jun, fai, wan, geng, which translate into stability, speed, accuracy, power all in one action. All of these things IMO have to do more with how skilled you are in applying the WC, rather than how "conditioned" you are. To me I'd rather have things that work when I am "not" in tip top shape than only work when I am in shape, as to be always in top form is impossible to maintain. The body will eventually break down and mentally it is impossible to maintain such a strict regimen.

For the rest of your post, on this forum all we can do is talk concept and theory, as your fact is my theory, since we are different individuals with different experiences. How can you talk about actual "Fighting" per say, when we are 1000 miles away from one another with no chance of personal interaction? The one thing I have learned is that there is a big difference between discussing things with other's online and actually being in contact with others and going over things.

I hear all the time that what works for one person doesn't always work for another, so if that is true, everything you say to me as fact is theory until I prove it for myself, and I do believe that is what everyone has to do eventually, prove it to yourself and make it your own.

James

[sihing]

.....ok, is it me, or is Terrence refusing to answer my question?:confused:

I believe he has been involved with Wing Chun as a whole for 20+yrs. He's involved with the Robert Chu line, but has experience in other lineages like William Cheung's TWC. He probably can't recognize your post as he is blinded by what we are saying and the broken record rebuttle that is soon to follow:)

[YungChun]

It's in his profile.. That is probably why he hasn't answered...



Date of Birth:
August 9, 1959
Age:
48
What's your MA style?:
WCK
How long have you trained?:
20+
Location:
St. Louis, MO USA
Occupation:
attorney



He was 'born again' not too long ago when he discovered 'sparring' or 'alive training'... :rolleyes:

[Knifefighter]

James,
IMO, you are just rationalizing your personal reasons for not keeping yourself in top physical shape.

Skills of high level will always be there whether one is in shape or not, but they will always work better the better shape a person is in.

A skillful 70 year old who keeps himself in shape will always be better than an out of shape 70 year old who also has skills.

[YungChun]

I think a good deal of the problem with the system-WCK is you just have so many people who don't want to fight and teaching others who are training a fighting system that ‘fighting is bad’ or something to be avoided, or represents some kind of test that should wait until fate brings it to you..

Maybe it's the culture, maybe folks are getting distracted by all the classical training, not sure.. In my experience when you have a bunch of guys in their 20's+ training to fight you will always have a good part of that group who is competitive in nature.. With just a little encouragement these folks WILL WANT TO FIGHT they WILL WANT TO COMPETE.. BUT if you just keep telling people no, no you need more ChiSao, you need to spend another 10 years training your forms, and training ChiSao then you are going to take the desire to fight out of a lot of them, they will think they are not ready, when in fact some of them are...

I don't think there is anything wrong with the traditional training, the forms, the ChiSao, if done correctly, and so on.. What is wrong, perhaps, is that some folks have been taught to stay in training mode for half their life and never go out there and compete or fight. IMO this should be the natural goal for at least some if not most people, who want to learn how to fight well. Competing in various formats is not BAD nor will it take away anything from traditional goals of training, in fact, it's where you can get some of the best 'experience' of your training days, by going outside and fighting people who fight differently, who you don't know, and who use different methods..

Not to mention that it is very exhilarating and exciting and fun to go out there and have a bunch of people watching you... If this mindset was more common in WCK I think there would be a lot less of a need for making excuses and justifying the training, as you would just see WCK folks out there fighting as the norm.. In the end Sport fighting and competing is not bad for the TMA it's what can take them to the next level, just ask Phil's guys how they feel after competing, I'll bet they will tell you they are better for the experience and will continue to compete.

[sihing]

James,
IMO, you are just rationalizing your personal reasons for not keeping yourself in top physical shape.

Skills of high level will always be there whether one is in shape or not, but they will always work better the better shape a person is in.

A skillful 70 year old who keeps himself in shape will always be better than an out of shape 70 year old who also has skills.

Dale,

I actually think we agree on this, as you just said above the skills will work regardless of being in shape or not, for the most part, it depends on what you are training in. Trying to knock someone out with your strikes is far less energy consuming than doing the same with kicks. Now concerning me and my lack of effort to stay in shape, I just started a bag work routine that involves 5 2 min rounds on the bag (kickboxing style), 5 rnds of 45 wrist punches then pivot punches, then 3 rnds of 20 each hard round kicks on bag both sides and 3 rnds of 20 of a two punch combo to work my structure while punching both sides ( I do this stuff for cardio and to get used to hitting something for real, and it helps solidify my structure), plus I workout at the gym 3x a week and class 3x a week, + the times I get together with the training partner, so I'm pretty active & in good shape for my age I believe. But all of this is nothing compared to how I see the MMA guys training on TUF or UFC shows, to keep that pace up and at that level you better love it or you won't do it. Freaks like Courture are not the general public.

Concerning th 70 yr old example, I agree, what I was trying to relate is that proven fighters have a regimend of conditioning drills so that their bodies can take the punishment of competitive fighting, they run, lift 300lb tires, pull things, isometrics, wind sprints with weights on, bla bla bla, none of which is combat specific but it helps in the end. But these guys are also on more supplements than you can count, have the best coaches and conditioning people working for them, and have all day to do it, most of us normal people don't have that luxury. You can't realistically make a comparison with proven fighters vs average people, because we can't train like them, nor do we have the motivation to train like them, generally anyway. So the question that pops into my head is, is it there high level conditioning that makes them good or is it there talent at what they do that makes them good. After I saw that UFC special profiling Shrek, I was totally impressed about this guys work ethic and the conditioning that he did, that is until we all found out he was on roids.

James

[YungChun]

You can't realistically make a comparison with proven fighters vs average people.
I don't know what you mean by "proven fighters" sounds like a Terence-ism.. "Fighters" are no more or less 'average' than anyone else who trains to fight.. A martial artist who trains a "fighting system" is supposed to be able to and does fight.


So the question that pops into my head is, is it there high level conditioning that makes them good or is it there talent at what they do that makes them good.

Fighting makes them good, in additoin to their regualar training and conditioning and natural attributes.

[sihing]

I don't know what you mean by "proven fighters" sounds like a Terence-ism.. "Fighters" are no more or less 'average' than anyone else who trains to fight.. A martial artist who trains a "fighting system" is supposed to be able to and does fight.

Fighting makes them good, in additoin to their regualar training and conditioning and natural attributes.

Hey Jim,

I was using T's terminology "proven fighters", to me that term means competition fighter or MMA guys. For example, to me Sifu Gary Lam is a fighter, but he is not conditioned. Can he compete with the elite of today? Nope, since he is out of shape and too old, his body couldn't take the rigors of training, never mind a ring fight. On the street he can handle himself for sure, as there are no rules and anything goes. He's not invincible, no one is, not even Randy Couture:).

Fighters do get better the more they fight, agreed, this is basics 101, everyone knows this. The thing is, from what I have seen, they spend lots of time drilling, condtioning and sparring, not just exclusively sparring. If you follow T's philosophy, why do anything else except spar? Why run, lift weights, hit the bag, skip etc... when fighting is all you need? This is all fine and dandy if you want to put the work in, some do, some don't. What we need are things that work for average people, with average amounts of time available for training, with average ability, motivation, skill, and teach them things that work without all the hyper physical attributes. I've been taught things that allow this to happen, and have seen it work in me and others that I have taught and trained with.

James

[Knifefighter]

On the street he can handle himself for sure, as there are no rules and anything goes.

How can you suddenly beat someone on the street when you couldn't beat them in the ring when they are limited to what they can do to you?

[YungChun]

Fighters do get better the more they fight, agreed, this is basics 101, everyone knows this.

And yet too few, it seems, are actually doing it..



The thing is, from what I have seen, they spend lots of time drilling, condtioning and sparring, not just exclusively sparring.

Absolutely, but they do spar and fight.



If you follow T's philosophy, why do anything else except spar?

T is an extremist. Who is at best unclear about what/how he thinks folks should be training, especially at the early stages of WCK. Still I don't think he advocates 'just sparring'..

IMO the classical work is great--add in some modern training work and then go out and apply it--fight in some kind of competition and then you have a total WCK package.

[Knifefighter]

Fighters do get better the more they fight, agreed, this is basics 101, everyone knows this. The thing is, from what I have seen, they spend lots of time drilling, condtioning and sparring, not just exclusively sparring. If you follow T's philosophy, why do anything else except spar? Why run, lift weights, hit the bag, skip etc... when fighting is all you need?

Almost all the supplemental things modern fighters do conditioning-wise are activity specific. There are sound scientific reasons why they do these things and sound scientific reasons for not doing things like forms, chi sao and wooden dummy stuff.

I know Victor thinks I am just pulling this stuff out of my ass, but I have a degree in exercise science/human performance and that background is where most of my opinions come from... not some ingrained hate for wing chun.

All arts, including the ones I expouse, have at least some limitations when you look at them from a scientific human performance standpoint. That's why the more progressive ones are constantly evolving as we learn more about human performance.

[Liddel]

Theres always going to be clear lines between those who want to do a MA for hobby, for protection and those who want to compete at high levels....

IMHO its about time people stopped using the actions and philosophy of one group as the yard stick for another.

I agree with a great deal of what T and Dale have said but i have my own ideas about which areas the 'criticisms' they've shared do and do not fit into.

some will just never understand that....

DREW

[YungChun]

why they do these things and sound scientific reasons for not doing things like forms, chi sao and wooden dummy stuff.
C'mon Dale..

The forms and ChiSao are Wing Chun specific training.. OF COURSE they are not going to train things from WCK if they don't do Wing Chun..

There are many benefits to ChiSao training for learning WCK.. If you would have read any of the posts explaining this..

IT IS CONTACT SPECIFIC CONDITIONED RESPONSE TRAINING... Only in this way can you train people to develop all of the basics of the system, which often involve developing CONTACT REFLEXES.. You can't just have people spar with person X and expect them to learn how to use feel and apply the contact applications without having FELT these things through CONTACT TRAINING..

The problem is that they don't take their training to the next level in most cases.. You make assertions that the guy you worked with who is a student of Phil probably or does have skills but you go on to say that it's not because of the classical training.. Well I ask you--how you can come off and speak for this person about what helped him develop the skills, that is pretty presumptuous..

Many of us HAVE BENEFITTED from this training and no matter how good YOU ARE or what you THINK YOU KNOW you DO NOT know what other people have benefited from, nor is it correct for you to speak for others who feel they have benefited from said training. Speak for yourself...

[YungChun]

Theres always going to be clear lines between those who want to do a MA for hobby, for protection and those who want to compete at high levels....

I agree.. BUT too many CMA teachers and schools have taken the FIGHT out of the FIGHT SYSTEM... Instead of trying to get students to the point where their ChiSao is "perfect" and make them wait YEARS before giving them the green light to move on to whatever the next STEP is in their training they should be stressing SPARRING and COMPETING in various fighting venues..

If this was the case and WCK folks were fighting there would be no need to constantly debate WCK fighting "theory" and instead just look and see what WCK fighting is.

[Knifefighter]

The forms and ChiSao are Wing Chun specific training.. OF COURSE they are not going to train things from WCK if they don't do Wing Chun..

Actually, if you have almost anyone with a degree in the human performance field analyze the objectives and realities of fighting and compare those with the training of chi sao, Mook Jong, and forms, they will tell you pretty the same thing I am saying.



There are many benefits to ChiSao training for learning WCK.. If you would have read any of the posts explaining this..

I'm sure there are, but those benefits don't have much to do with fighting.


You make assertions that the guy you worked with who is a student of Phil probably or does have skills but you go on to say that it's not because of the classical training.. Well I ask you--how you can come off and speak for this person about what helped him develop the skills, that is pretty presumptuous..

I am stating my opinion based on my education and experience in the field of human performance. Based on what I know about the field, my opinion is that you could take a guy like him and make him 10 times better by having him train with a more modern MMA approach.

[YungChun]

Actually, if you have almost anyone with a degree in the human performance field analyze the objectives and realities of fighting and compare those with the training of chi sao, Mook Jong, and forms, they will tell you pretty the same thing I am saying.

Actually I have worked with people with these kinds of qualifications and strangely those who are familiar with the contact training think it is completely valid..

Why don't you share how you think the CONTACT FIGHTING techniques and tactics of WCK should be trained other than through contact training <chi sao>..


I am stating my opinion based on my education and experience in the field of human performance.
RIGHT..

So you meet a guy who trains WCK, yes that means the classical DRILLS and CHISAO, complement his abilities and then share with us the revelation that his WCK skills are not a product of his WCK training.

Very impressive..and scientific. :rolleyes:

[Knifefighter]

Actually I have worked with people with these kinds of qualifications and strangely those who are familiar with the contact training think it is completely valid..
Why don't you share how you think the CONTACT FIGHTING techniques and tactics of WCK should be trained other than through contact training <chi sao>..

Learning WCK through chi sao is fine for learning WCK. Learning to fight, however, should be done more along the ways that modern fighting systems do it, which is to start with the fight itself and let that be the guide for the drills and techniques... and don't let non-specific techniques or drills leak into the program.


So you meet a guy who trains WCK, yes that means the classical DRILLS and CHISAO, complement his abilities and then share with us the revelation that his WCK skills are not a product of his WCK training.
Very impressive..and scientific.

I am basing my opinion based on my knowledge of other scientific studies that have been done over the years, which is how science is actaully applied in the real world. I was not conducting a scientific study myself.

And, as I said before, there is a differentiation between WCK skills and fighting skills.

[sihing]

Almost all the supplemental things modern fighters do conditioning-wise are activity specific. There are sound scientific reasons why they do these things and sound scientific reasons for not doing things like forms, chi sao and wooden dummy stuff.

I know Victor thinks I am just pulling this stuff out of my ass, but I have a degree in exercise science/human performance and that background is where most of my opinions come from... not some ingrained hate for wing chun.

All arts, including the ones I expouse, have at least some limitations when you look at them from a scientific human performance standpoint. That's why the more progressive ones are constantly evolving as we learn more about human performance.

Well all I can say is that I punch allot harder now than I did with my previous TWC training, I've felt it, and so have others. As well, I punched alot harder after my first year in TWC, than I did with no training at all. I'm not saying that WC offers the only or best way of doing things, but to deny it totally is foolish. Regarding dummy work and forms, these are basics. Anything that you do alone is basics pure and simple. The problem is, probably due to movies and media hype, people think the secret form will make them a super fighter. Anyone and everyone that knows anything about fighting knows this is not true. Chi sau is one step up from basics, it takes you from static unalive, predetermined actions and applies them in a "more" alive environment. Believe it or not there are more stages beyond chi sau training in WC, again the problem lies in people getting stuck in the progression of things. That's their fault, the teachers fault, not the arts.

After watching the Human Weapon espisodes, anyone can justify anything scientifically. Elbow down, connected with the hip, while rooting is powerful. Doing it while standing still, means nothing. The key is to be able to do that while you and your opponent are moving and he is trying to hit as well.

James

P.S. I believe there is a report from a kinesiologist anaylzing HFY Wing Chun and how effective what they teach is biomechanically in the Mastering Kung Fu Book? Who do we listen too??

[YungChun]

Learning WCK through chi sao is fine for learning WCK. Learning to fight, however, should be done more along the ways that modern fighting systems do it, which is to start with the fight itself and let that be the guide for the drills and techniques... and don't let non-specific techniques or drills leak into the program.



I am basing my opinion based on my knowledge of other scientific studies that have been done over the years, which is how science is actaully applied in the real world. I was not conducting a scientific study myself.

And, as I said before, there is a differentiation between WCK skills and fighting skills.
Right so what you ARE REALLY SAYING is that Wing Chun tactics and techniques have no place in 'REAL FIGHTNG' right?

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

What I find amusing is that these guys will be the first ones to tell you that pad work is great, hitting bags is great.. But ChiSao where you are actually trying to HIT AND CONTROL an alive and moving partner while he is trying to HIT AND CONTROL you is not relevant..

The real question is how far some people's heads are up their butts.. :p

[sihing]

C'mon Dale..

The forms and ChiSao are Wing Chun specific training.. OF COURSE they are not going to train things from WCK if they don't do Wing Chun..

There are many benefits to ChiSao training for learning WCK.. If you would have read any of the posts explaining this..

IT IS CONTACT SPECIFIC CONDITIONED RESPONSE TRAINING... Only in this way can you train people to develop all of the basics of the system, which often involve developing CONTACT REFLEXES.. You can't just have people spar with person X and expect them to learn how to use feel and apply the contact applications without having FELT these things through CONTACT TRAINING..

The problem is that they don't take their training to the next level in most cases.. You make assertions that the guy you worked with who is a student of Phil probably or does have skills but you go on to say that it's not because of the classical training.. Well I ask you--how you can come off and speak for this person about what helped him develop the skills, that is pretty presumptuous..

Many of us HAVE BENEFITTED from this training and no matter how good YOU ARE or what you THINK YOU KNOW you DO NOT know what other people have benefited from, nor is it correct for you to speak for others who feel they have benefited from said training. Speak for yourself...


I agree, good post:)

[sihing]

Learning WCK through chi sao is fine for learning WCK. Learning to fight, however, should be done more along the ways that modern fighting systems do it, which is to start with the fight itself and let that be the guide for the drills and techniques... and don't let non-specific techniques or drills leak into the program.



I am basing my opinion based on my knowledge of other scientific studies that have been done over the years, which is how science is actaully applied in the real world. I was not conducting a scientific study myself.

And, as I said before, there is a differentiation between WCK skills and fighting skills.

I agree, Chi sau is WC specific things. The reason you start learning "Non" related things to fighting first is simple, your learning a new way to move, react, position, face. Like T has said in the past, everyone instinctively knows how to fight, all we are doing is refining it and making a bit more efficient, simple and direct in application. The goal is never to perform tan sau, pak sau, or stick to your opponent, that is the training part of Wing Chun, the goal is to destroy, hit, subdue, submit, whatever it takes to defeat the person in front of you. We just use a differnt method or engine than you to get to the same place. Tweak that engine, test it out in different environments, refine it a bit more, test it again and again and you will have something useful. WC is a "TRAINING" system, not a method of fighting. Only the individual can decide what to do in a fight, not a prearranged, 300 yr old fighting method:)

James

[YungChun]

I agree, Chi sau is WC specific things. The reason you start learning "Non" related things to fighting

It's all related to WCK fighting... That is WCK fighting tools and tactics.. In the early stages you break it down though, just like any art does..

And keep this in mind: Do you really think the system hasn't evolved in the last 300 years? Hell I have seen it evolve in the last week...

What (unbiased) Dale seems to be saying is that what is in WCK the tools, tactics and so on, have no place in real fighting. :rolleyes:

[Liddel]

I'm sure there are, but those benefits don't have much to do with fighting.

The elbow behaviour - one of VT's most common and consistent elements (even between all the different lineages we have) is taught and made habbit by way of Chi Dan Sao and forms, in the very early stages of ones overall training.

As a result you'll see the same behaviour of my elbow displayed in Chi Sao as being the same as when i fight, bar the dynamics of a totally moving environment :). This doesnt mean i dont have things from outside the box also....

You would also find the energy use in the main parts of my vt engine (the shoulder the elbow the wrist and the waist) would show more similarities between fighting and the chi sao drills i do, than differences.

So for me there are direct applications of Chi Sao and forms to my fighting Behavior. The drills are just to concentrate and isolate certain elements and wont do me harm if i realise their position/relevance in the training food chain.

I agree though there are other ways to train these elements as you see fit and other aspects of training are needed to support them.

But one cannot say IMHO that there is no correlation to fighting unless you have only touched the surface or are looking for shapes.

Our minds are what makes or breaks this approach.

DREW

[sihing]

It's all releated to WCK fighting... That is WCK fighting tools and tactics.. In the early stages you break it down though, just like any art does..

And keep this in mind: Do you think the system has not evolved in the last 300 years? Hell I have seen in evolve in the last week...

What (unbiased) Dale is saying is that what is in WCK the tools, tactics and so on, have no place in real fighing. :rolleyes:

I don't know if he's saying that exactly, I believe T and him have a problem with the TMA model of forms, chi sau, dummy, pole and knives alone as a way to teach someone how to fight effectively. I agree that the art has evolved. Sifu Lam has evolved his WC very differently than what he learned strictly from WSL, due to many factors, his size, his experience, his natural abilities and attributes, his genius. He could kick my a$$ pretty easy, and I'm almost 20 yrs his junior and in way better shape. He has too much experience, knowledge, skill and has a FIGHTER mentality, whereas I am don't.

As for the term WCK fighting, I don't believe in that. I believe there is just fighting, and what you take into a fight is your experience, your training, your guts, and how your body moves (this is the only part that WC has an effect on). For me, I am in the learning stage so try to stay strict with the WC, but that doesn't mean I can't throw in a left hook and low round kick to take someone out if I have too:)

James

[sihing]

The elbow behaviour - one of VT's most common and consistent elements (even between all the different lineages we have) is taught and made habbit by way of Chi Dan Sao and forms, in the very early stages of ones overall training.

As a result you'll see the same behaviour of my elbow displayed in Chi Sao as being the same as when i fight, bar the dynamics of a totally moving environment :). This doesnt mean i dont have things from outside the box also....

You would also find the energy use in the main parts of my vt engine (the shoulder the elbow the wrist and the waist) would show more similarities between fighting and the chi sao drills i do, than differences.

So for me there are direct applications of Chi Sao and forms to my fighting Behavior. The drills are just to concentrate and isolate certain elements and wont do me harm if i realise their position/relevance in the training food chain.

I agree though there are other ways to train these elements as you see fit and other aspects of training are needed to support them.

But one cannot say IMHO that there is no correlation to fighting unless you have only touched the surface or are looking for shapes.

Our minds are what makes or breaks this approach.

DREW

Good post Drew, it may not be exact (and I think alot of people try to look for it when they watch a WC man fighting, tan sau's fok sau's, sitting and sticking), but what you have learned will come out naturally. When you see Sifu Lam on the DVD's, or in the real, you see very little of what "WC should look like". This is because he is so far from the basics, and purely natural with his movements that it is all there within him, plus he uses it when needed and is not a slave to the system.

James

[YungChun]

As for the term WCK fighting, I don't believe in that.

I'm sure that you are using the specialized tools of the system and training it's 'concepts' as you have mentioned in the past-----right? To a certain extent this is semantics: If you are using WCK tools and tactics and training them, and USING THEM IN FIGHITNG... You are USING WCK FIGHTING, in my book.. That doesn't mean you can't add what is your own, but it means WCK is your base style.

When you fight you shouldn't be thinking about anything but fighitng--whatever that means to the person.... Some folks do think a lot in terms of strategy..esp in BJJ...

[Knifefighter]

After watching the Human Weapon espisodes, anyone can justify anything scientifically.

The Human Weapon program was far from scientific.



P.S. I believe there is a report from a kinesiologist anaylzing HFY Wing Chun and how effective what they teach is biomechanically in the Mastering Kung Fu Book? Who do we listen too??

Can you tell me who the kinesiologist is? I would be interested in seeing what sources he is citing.

[YungChun]

has evolved his WC very differently than

I don't know if he's saying that exactly

He's free to reject the idea..............................

I think he feels that 98% (about right Dale?) of WCK tools and tactics (whatever that means to him) are complete crap...

[Knifefighter]

Right so what you ARE REALLY SAYING is that Wing Chun tactics and techniques have no place in 'REAL FIGHTNG' right?

Not necessarily... I am saying that many of the techniques and training methods are not as good as others out there.

I've stated before that I believe some of the tactics and strategies can have a place in a well rounded tool box. I just believe that it is not smart to get all your tools from this area.
-----------------------------


What I find amusing is that these guys will be the first ones to tell you that pad work is great, hitting bags is great.. But ChiSao where you are actually trying to HIT AND CONTROL an alive and moving partner while he is trying to HIT AND CONTROL you is not relevant..

It is not relevant because it is not specific to fighting. It is an artificial construct that does not happen during fighting.

[sihing]

I'm sure that you are using the specialized tools of the system and training it's 'concepts' as you have mentioned in the past-----right? To a certain extent this is semantics: If you are using WCK tools and tactics and training them, and USING THEM IN FIGHITNG... You are USING WCK FIGHTING, in my book.. That doesn't mean you can't add what is your own, but it means WCK is your base style.

When you fight you shouldn't be thiinking about anything but fighitng--whatever that means to the person.... Some folks do think a lot in terms of strategy..esp in BJJ...

Alot of this depends on distance. For example, I am not going to sit in a Forward facing YJKYM stance with Man/Wu sau ready and waiting from outside of kicking distance. I want to be able to use my reach and longer distance tools from there and be more mobile, watching my opponent and looking for strengths/weaknesses, while being ready to pounce on a opening. Now as the distance gets closer I may sit more, and protect my centerline more, but until I actually make contact with my opponent I can still use what most consider non WC tools, low line kicks (ala savate or MT), feints, nerve destructions, whatever. Now when contact is made I think hit, and go from there. Yeah for sure my WC attributes will kick in here, since this is the range it specializes in, but all kinds of stuff can still come out, headbutts, elbows, lowline knees, upper cuts and tight hooks even, as the goal is to take the guy out, not perform WC. For me I am just fighting, not perfoming WC, as IMO WC is a training system, not something that tells me if he does this I do that.

IMO stand up fighting is harder and way more dangerous simply do to the fact that much more can happen to you when you are standing up, plus mobility plays a bigger role than when on the ground, you are safer there, and more able to control, due to a lack of mobility and by simply using your weight to crowd them.

James

[YungChun]

It is not relevant because it is not specific to fighting. It is an artificial construct that does not happen during fighting.
Anytime you have two folks working to control and hit each other you have two guys training to control and hit.. As I have said before... Once you get past the starting point of the DRILL, you are simply trying to do the above, control and hit each other..

What you are saying is that because they are using WCK tools and tactics and NOT SOMETHING ELSE, that what they are doing is not relevant to fighitng; when what this really means is it's not relevant to YOUR FIGHTING..

Hitting and controlling, or controlling to submit or any combination of the above is all very much relevant to 'fighting'. The question is if you use what you train or not in fighting.. If I use it, or if someone else uses it then it is relevant to their training and methodology.

[sihing]

The Human Weapon program was far from scientific.




Can you tell me who the kinesiologist is? I would be interested in seeing what sources he is citing.

It looked pretty scientific to me:)

I loaned the book out, when I get it back I will let you know who the kinesiologist is. I do think he is a student in the system, and because of his occupation he was able to see it's effectiveness immediately, according to his belief's.

[YungChun]

Alot of this depends on distance. For example, I am not going to sit in a Forward facing YJKYM stance with Man/Wu sau ready and waiting from outside of kicking distance.
Is this what you would call WCK fighting? :o

This isn't so complicated.

What's your base style/method of training/fighting in?

Boxing?

Tae Kwon Do?

Savate?

Judo?

Thai Boxing?

BJJ?

WCK?

Nothing?

Everything?

[Knifefighter]

has evolved his WC very differently than
He's free to reject the idea..............................

I think he feels that 98% (about right Dale?) of WCK tools and tactics (whatever that means to him) are complete crap...

I think 98% of chi sao, forms, wooden dummy, and blindy following "centerline" theory is crap for developing fighting skills.

Can one use "WCK tools and tactics for fighting"? Sure, especially if one is bigger and stronger than his opponent or just wants to keep his opponent at bay. Overall, I believe there are more effective methods out there.

[Knifefighter]

Anytime you have two folks working to control and hit each other you have two guys training to control and hit.. As I have said before... Once you get past the starting point of the DRILL, you are simply trying to do the above, control and hit each other..

What you are saying is that because they are using WCK tools and tactics and NOT SOMETHING ELSE, that what they are doing is not relevant to fighitng; when what this really means is it's not relevant to YOUR FIGHTING..

Actually, what I am saying is that they will only be able to use the specific tactics and tools that they have learned from chi sao when they are going against an opponent who is agreeing to do the same thing. As soon as someone doesn't agree to this, it becomes irrelevant.

[YungChun]

I think 98% of chi sao, forms, wooden dummy, and blindy following "centerline" theory is crap for developing fighting skills.

Right, so there you go...

This is good stuff.

WCK--A close range infighting system, based on using the opponent's energy, that, according to Dale is almost useful if you're:


bigger and stronger than his opponent or just wants to keep his opponent at bay.

[Knifefighter]

It looked pretty scientific to me:).

It was pseudo science. A scientific program would cite specific studies that have been published in peer reviewed scientific journals for human performance studies.

[Knifefighter]

Right, so there you go...

This is good stuff.

WCK--A close range infighting system, based on using the opponent's energy, that, according to Dale is almost useful if you're:

Yep, and that's exactly why so many people cannot use it to fight with... because they try to make it something that it isn't.

[sihing]

Is this what you would call WCK fighting? :o

This isn't so complicated.

What's your base style/method of training/fighting in?

Boxing?

Tae Kwon Do?

Savate?

Judo?

Thai Boxing?

BJJ?

WCK?

Nothing?

Everything?

I only have formal training in Wing Chun, first TWC for 18yrs, now in the WSL/GL method. But that doesn't mean I can't pick up a thing or two from other sources, non formally. I loved the way Bruce Lee kicked, so I practiced that and got some minor skills in kicking ( and my first instructor in TWC was a excellent kicker as he knew a few styles besides TWC). I've always been curious about other arts, and have investigated alot of them, but due to my isolated location was not able to train specifically in those things. WC is my love, but I realize I don't have to be limited by it. Throwing out a nerve distruction, ala Defang the Snake from Inosanto FMA is not too different from a pak/chuen sau I used to do in TWC, I just bend at my elbow and there it is. Headbutts, do you really need personal lessons to do that? I used to think all I needed was strict WC, which used to tell me that if he does this I do that. I've grown since then and have learned the goal is to be natural and to not be a slave to any one method or way of doing things, but as I said right now I am in a learning stage so I stay to strict WC things when I chi sau and teach, simply because I want to absorb what it has to teach me.

James

[YungChun]

Actually, what I am saying is that they will only be able to use the specific tactics and tools that they have learned from chi sao when they are going against an opponent who is agreeing to do the same thing. As soon as someone doesn't agree to this, it becomes irrelevant.

Agree to do what? Control and hit? Control?

A BJJist is going to train ground.. If someone else doesn't agree " agreeing to do the same thing" in a fight does that make the BJJ training irrelevant?

Again, you are saying that training one methodology--WCK tools and tactics, is not relevant because it is not your methodology or another methodology.. You are very simply saying that WCK tools and tactics are irrelevant.. Just admit it Dale..

In reality.. Training to control and hit is relevant to fighting PERIOD...

You would argue training to hit and control a heavy bag is better, than training to control and hit using WCK tools/tactics.. I am afraid I disagree..

If WCK ever gets on the fight map perhaps you will change your tune.. Until then, you are going to continue to dismiss the art and be a troll—just admit it..

[YungChun]

Yep, and that's exactly why so many people cannot use it to fight with... because they try to make it something that it isn't.
Of course..

My mistake..

How silly of me..

Wing Chun is a LONG RANGE system, that is designed to train us to over power weaker people with superior muscle power..

I stand corrected.. WAA.. :rolleyes::eek::confused::D

Dale, the UFC is on.. Go watch TV... :p

[sihing]

It was pseudo science. A scientific program would cite specific studies that have been published in peer reviewed scientific journals for human performance studies.

I said it looked scientific, but when they did that I realized that is was mostly BS as well. For example, the ridge hand technique from Okinawian Karate can generate 400lbs of pressure per square inch (according to there calculations and demonstrations with computer generated images), more than enough to break a bone in the neck and bla bla bla. The problem is you have to have the delivery system to get it there while not getting a ridge hand in the neck yourself. My point is anyone can give evidence and say it is scientific.

Dale, I think it would be cool if you visited with Sifu Lam sometime, or got one of his video's, looked at it and then came back with a paper stating scientifically why it would or wouldn't work biomechanically. Honestly I would be curious to see what your conclusions would be and why (in detail that is).

James

[Knifefighter]

A BJJist is going to train ground.. If someone else doesn't agree " agreeing to do the same thing" in a fight does that make the BJJ training irrelevant?

If anyone could keep a fight from going to the ground and/or the specific positions of BJJ were not used when actually fighting, BJJ would, indeed, be completely irrelevant.

If I could never take an opponent to the ground and fights did not go there, or if I were unable to get to the positions I had trained in, then my BJJ training would have no relevance to fighting for me.



Again, you are saying that training one methodology--WCK tools and tactics, is not relevant because it is not your methodology or another methodology.. You are very simply saying that WCK tools and tactics are irrelevant.. Just admit it Dale..

Chi sao, Mook Jong, and forms are irrelevant. Sparring "using WCK tools and tactics" is not necessarily so, although I believe there are better ways to do so.


In reality.. Training to control and hit is relevant to fighting PERIOD...

Not when it is using positions that are not done in fighting.


If WCK ever gets on the fight map perhaps you will change your tune.. Until then, you are going to continue to dismiss the art and be a troll—just admit it..

Is stating my opinions and debating why I support them trolling?

[YungChun]

You can't support them because your argument is based on the assumption that the contact fighting methods of WCK are crap..<troll> This is the basis for your argument.. Please admit that so we can move on..

[YungChun]

If anyone could keep a fight from going to the ground {snip} BJJ would, indeed, be completely irrelevant.

Hmmm, no one has ever finished a fight standing.. ?

Interesting, so you think BJJ is irrelevant?


Not when it is using positions that are not done in fighting.

Which positons and who's fighting?

I use elbows, fists, palms, jams, grabs and pins, with varied timing and angles, using WCK tactics and mechanics, based on my traning...

Go ahead and explain and support why that's not relevant to MY FIGHTING..

[Knifefighter]

You can't support them because your argument is based on the assumption that the contact fighting methods of WCK are crap..<troll> This is the basis for your argument.. Please admit that so we can move on..

Chi sao is an inefficient method for training because it violates the law of specificity. Specificty for fight training means that one should train fighting techniques that are as close to the actual movements and positions as those which occure in fighting as possible. Since you almost never see the specific positions and movemenst that are done in chi sao performed in real fighting (even when done by those who are fighters who have done this type of training in practice). This is one of the ways that are used to analyze effective vs. ineffective training methods.

[YungChun]

Chi sao is an inefficient method for training because it violates the law of specificity. Specificty for fight training means that one should train fighting techniques that are as close to the actual movements and positions as those which occure in fighting as possible. Since you almost never see the specific positions and movemenst that are done in chi sao performed in real fighting (even when done by those who are fighters who have done this type of training in practice). This is one of the ways that are used to analyze effective vs. ineffective training methods.
Again,

Which positons and who's fighting?

I use elbows, fists, palms, jams, grabs and pins, with varied timing and angles, using WCK tactics and mechanics, based on my training, in part from ChiSao...

Go ahead and explain and support why that's not relevant to MY FIGHTING..

[Knifefighter]

Hmmm, no one has ever finished a fight standing.. ?

Interesting, so you think BJJ is irrelevant?

BJJ is relevant because fights go to the ground and the specific positions of BJJ are used when fights occur there.


I use elbows, fists, palms, jams, grabs and pins, with varied timing and angles, using WCK tactics and mechanics, based on my traning...

Go ahead and explain and support why that's not relevant to MY FIGHTING..

The only way I would be able to do this is if you were to post a video of you fighting full contact against a non-WC fighter and one of you doing chi sao. I'd be happy to do the analysis if you want to post the video.

[YungChun]

BJJ is relevant because fights go to the ground and the specific positions of BJJ are used when fights occur there.

All fights go to the ground? Sounds like theory..

If NOT ALL fights go to the ground then BJJ positions, especially their starting positions MUST be theory and/or only used by people who AGREE to use those positions..


That is the only way I would be able to do this is if you were to post a video of you fighting full contact against a non-WC fighter and one of you doing chi sao.

So you think when a Wing Chun guy fights he "is doing ChiSao'? Uhh huh..

Video is irrelevant.. If I train using the same tools and tactics that I do in fighting then the training is relevant TO ME..

[Knifefighter]

All fights go to the ground? Sounds like theory..

Of course all fights don't necessarily go to the ground. If I have a fight with someone and the fight does not go to the ground, my BJJ training was irrelevant in that particular situation. Thats why I train takedowns and standup striking.



So you think when a Wing Chun guy fights he "is doing ChiSao'? Uhh huh..

No, but analyzing the specific movements and positions of one's chi sao and comparing it to his fighting will show which parts of chi sao are irrelevant and can be thrown out (the modern training approach).




Video is irrelevant.. If I train using the same tools and tactics that I do in fighting then the training is relevant..

Video is relevant. You say that you fight a certain way, but there is no evidence of it.

[Knifefighter]

BJJ positions, especially their starting positions MUST be theory and/or only used by people who AGREE to use those positions..

Starting from the knees is very irrelevant to fighting, which is why most people either immediately give up or take position, rather than attempt to fight for position from the knees. It is also why it is important to train takedowns and throws.

[YungChun]

So, I have to prove that I fight a certain way..ahhhh... Absurd.. I can only fight using the movements and methods I know.. I'm not saying that makes me a world class fighter either. But since I am mainly trained as a WCK guy I am afraid THAT is the ONLY TRAINING that COULD really infuence how I fight, it's REALLY a no brainer..

I thought you were debating using the ideas in play.. Apparently not.

[YungChun]

One day....maybe you'll get it...



Starting from the knees is very irrelevant to fighting, which is why most people either immediately give up or take position

Starting from the LUK SAO (ROLLING) is very irrelevant to fighting, which is why most people either immediately give up or take position <attack and control> in ChiSao...

[Knifefighter]

So, I have to prove that I fight a certain way..ahhhh... Absurd.. I can only fight using the movements and methods I know.. I'm not saying that makes me a world class fighter either. But since I am mainly trained as a WCK guy I am afraid THAT is the ONLY TRAINING that COULD really infuence how I fight, it's REALLY a no brainer..

Well, since you were accusing me of being a troll... and since you are claiming to fight a certain way, but there is no video evidence of it available... where exactly do you fight? Only in the confines of your training studio with your students? Full contact or just play fighting?


...and didn't I read a post not to long ago of you saying not too long ago that you don't really fight?


I thought you were debating using the ideas in play.. Apparently not.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

[Knifefighter]

One day....maybe you'll get it...



Starting from the LUK SAO (ROLLING) is very irrelevant to fighting, which is why most people either immediately give up or take position <attack and control> in ChiSao...

The problem is that almost of the follow up movements are also irrelevant to fighting.

[YungChun]

Well, since you were accusing me of being a troll... and since you are claiming to fight a certain way, but there is no video evidence of it available... where exactly do you fight? Only in the confines of your training studio with your students?


...and didn't I read a post not to long ago of you say not to long ago that you don't really fight?
How often I fight and who and where and so on, is of no matter, I have nothing to prove to you, since HOW I fight was at issue..which relates to HOW WCK people fight--this is not about ME buddy..

You are now intimating that I am not a good fighter.. This is more trollish behavior and has no relationship to the issue <that was> at hand which was HOW, not HOW WELL or HOW OFTEN..

[YungChun]

The problem is that almost of the follow up movements are also irrelevant to fighting.
Right...

So why don't you just admit that you simply think that WCK, methods and tools, which is what you are referring to <WCK> is irrelevant to fighting..? :confused:

I really don't understand why you have to dance around this issue...

[Knifefighter]

How often I fight and who and where and so on, is of no matter, I have nothing to prove to you, since HOW I fight was at issue..which relates to HOW WCK people fight--this is not about ME buddy..

You are now intimating that I am not a good fighter.. This is more trollish behavior and has no relationship to the issue <that was> at hand which was HOW..

How you fight had no relationship to the issue UNTIL you brought it up as support for your argument. Once you use how you fight as support for your position, it became relevant.

I have no idea of whether or not you are a good or awful fighter, since I have never seen you fight. I could make a better determination of that if you were to post the video of you fighting. That should be relatively easy to do since you are stating that you are fight using WCK methods.

[Knifefighter]

Right...

So why don't you just admit that you simply think that WCK, methods and tools, which is what you are referring to <WCK> is irrelevant to fighting..? :confused:

I really don't understand why you have to dance around this issue...

I've already told you what I think. Go back and read my posts again if you didn't get it the first time.

[YungChun]

How you fight had no relationship to the issue UNTIL you brought it up as support for your argument. Once you use how you fight as support for your position, it became relevant.

I have no idea of whether or not you are a good or awful fighter, since I have never seen you fight. I could make a better determination of that if you were to post the video of you fighting. That should be relatively easy to do since you are stating that you are fight using WCK methods.
Dale what I do has nothing to do with the point..

HOW ANYONE fights is how they train.. as if you didn't already know that.

Again, you can't stick to the point and so demand proof of something via video when no proof is needed.. The point was that if the training reflects the goals and actions used in fighting then the training is relevant to that fighter.

[Knifefighter]

How you fight had no relationship to the issue UNTIL you brought it up as support for your argument. Once you use how you fight as support for your position, it became relevant.

Oops, my bad! Reading comphrehension sucked on that one.

The reason for my questions is that if you are only doing play sparring with your students in your school, that is not fighting and you are not actually fighting using the things you have claimed.

[YungChun]

I've already told you what I think. Go back and read my posts again if you didn't get it the first time.
BS..

You just keep alluding to it without saying it outright.. C'mon I know you can do it..

[YungChun]

The reason for my questions is that if you are only doing play sparring with your students in your school, that is not fighting and you are not actually fighting using the things you have claimed.
First off I have no school.. These days I just train with a few freinds in a small group when possible. If my situation changes I plan to resume more serious training and also do some of that theoretical BJJ.. :p

Second this is nonsense and is not about quality.. I aleady know what you think of 'WCK fighters'.

I know how I fight...thanks..

[Knifefighter]

BS..

You just keep alluding to it without saying it outright.. C'mon I know you can do it..

Here's a summary since you seemed to have missed it- chi sao: 80-90% waste of time; forms: complete waste of time; Mook Jong 95-100% waste of time; sparring: anywhere from fully effective (when done realistically) to 90% waste of time (depending on how unrealistic it compares to real fighting).

Anything else?

[YungChun]

Here's a summary since you seemed to have missed it- chi sao: 80-90% waste of time; forms: complete waste of time; Mook Jong 95-100% waste of time; sparring: anywhere from fully effective (when done realistically) to 90% waste of time (depending on how unrealistic it compares to real fighting).

Anything else?
Yes..

Could you summerize all that into what you give WCK in general?

Thanks so much... :)

[Knifefighter]

Yes..

Could you summerize all that into what you give WCK in general?

Thanks so much... :)

Seems to me that most of the WC posters here have already said that 90% of WC being taught is crap, so I'll go with 98%. :)

You're welcome (or is it your welcome?).

[Knifefighter]

First off I have no school.. These days I just train with a few freinds in a small group when possible. .

So why don't you just admit that you don't really fight full contact and so can't really say whether or not WCK tactics and methods from chi sao really work for real fighting?

[YungChun]

Seems to me that most of the WC posters here have already said that 90% of WC being taught is crap, so I'll go with 98%. :)

You're welcome (or is it your welcome?).
Hey, the orignal number I guessed.. Great minds think alike.. :cool:

All I can say is that I hope WCK does better in getting on the fight map in the future and proving you wrong... :p

[Knifefighter]

YC- Thanks for the debate. That was fun.

[YungChun]

So why don't you just admit that you don't really fight full contact and so can't really say that WCK tactics and methods really work for real fighting?
It wouldn't matter..

If I tell you I fight full contact you'd just say that I wasn't fighting people good enough for it to matter.. I am sorry I am not up to snuff..

I do spar full contact with the folks in my group when I can get their lazy asses to come over but not as much as I used to...

Is it that big of a deal?

I used to fight in tournaments using full contact when I was younger..

I am older now and I certainly not at the peak of my training..

I really wish I was though, I would love to try NHB..

I do hope to get into better condition in the future in the hopes of improving as best as I can ..

[YungChun]

YC- Thanks for the debate. That was fun.
No prob my pleasure. ;)

[YungChun]

Long silence to ensue..

For some comic releif... I love this clip.. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5kDIiunSrc

I particularly like the part about 56 seconds in when he apparently is defending a vicious bee attack.. :D

[Ultimatewingchun]

If you're someone who has never really worked with and understood all that can be gleaned from the forms - and especially SIU LIM TAO ...(psst: relaxed but very alive and powerful energy while working with a stable base - and then a moving base in chum kiu...and then the use of elbows and more counters and attacks in bil jee not covered in the first two forms - now using even longer stepping motions than the first two forms)...

and if you've never really learned all the numerous principles, strategies, concepts, techniques & counters, footwork, balance, and the ability to unbalance the other guy by interception of his limbs or his middle body as it is in motion trying to hit, pull, or push you...as well as the redirection, push, pull and manipulation that you just blatantly attacked him with - and how you managed to stay on top of him and literally smother him with strikes and forward movement at a very close range while always using two hands simultaneously for attack and defense...and the use/development of the eyes in a very close quarter situation that you could never do before - all to be gleaned from chi sao...and longer arm kiu sao...

And if you've never really experienced the serious speed, power, and seemingly non-stop free-flowing followup combinations that sometimes just come out of nowhere to the point where you can't even remember all the moves you put on the guy in the course of 6 seconds or so - and perhaps don't even remember the fact that you actually may have struck him with something (or blocked his stuff) for a total of about ten different moves or so - and you didnt get hit or kicked back with any damage to speak of (if at all)...that can come from chi sao - including the use of elbows and knees...

and if you're someone who has failed to glimpse not only the technigues that can come out of working with the wooden dummy but also the use of the dummy as a tool sharpening skill (like punching mitts, bags, and shields) - and my dummy is completely padded except for the arms and leg - so I can blast it with punches, palm strikes, elbows, knees, and kicks full force - while still having his (the opponent's) arms and a leg in play to manipulate/block all the time while in the process of pounding hard and fast techniques and strikes of my own...

and if you've never done the progressions (translations) that ten tigers outlined so well in post #145 on page 10 of this thread - so that chi sao seamlessly begins to graduate to spontaneous sparring drills and then outright sparring...

THEN OF COURSE YOU'RE GONNA THINK FORMS, CHI SAO, AND WOODEN DUMMY ARE USELESS FIGHTING/TRAINING METHODS.


Duh!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

[YungChun]

I don't think it matters in Dale's case.. He just doesn't seem to think that WCK moves, control and so on is viable for 'real fighting' which in his terms would seem to mean MMA level competition..

The question is why don't we see any WCK fighters fighting at this level? Are there ANY?

I think the system has some great possibilities but if so why aren't we seeing it?

[Lugoman]

Long silence to ensue..

For some comic releif... I love this clip.. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5kDIiunSrc

I particularly like the part about 56 seconds in when he apparently is defending a vicious bee attack.. :D

Awesome! Textbook techniques on how to kick, trap and lock an adolescent.
This reminds me so much of Ted Gambodella beating the snot out of his son "Teddy."

My God! There are so many bigger dragons to slay than WCK.

[Liddel]

It is not relevant because it is not specific to fighting. It is an artificial construct that does not happen during fighting.

Your thinking shapes again mate. Every person ive sparred with and fought has tried to punch my lights out.

Chi Sao enabled me to not only deal with the blows but also to spot and create spaces for me to land my own blows.

Ive landed good powerful straight punches to the head while recieving hooks.

Ive blocked hooks to the body while landing my own elbow :eek: to the opponents face.

Nothing new for any style focused on stand up ranges, but your quote above obviously is specific to VT and these examples have happened to me in fighting. Each time i could relate my behaviour back to something learnt and/or drilled in isolation during VT's Chi Sao.

Im only talking hands here, not even touching on kicking, which i train in other drills centered around sticking...which is another way of saying "staying in range"

Given, it wouldnt be classed as 1 to 1 to 1 as T puts it, but more 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 with regard to building skills bit by bit within Chi Sao, Gor Sao, Lux Sao, Fighting !

Chi Sao Does occur in fighting but it certainly does not manifest itself in the form of three repeated actions which is a flawed view anyway.

DREW

[YungChun]

A post I found on 'another forum'...

If you can laugh at this stuff then you are comfortable with your training.. I think it's histerical... :D

Kind of on topic..



Watch your spelling. In order to not start a lineage war, you should really spell it Wving Tschxung Gung Fu. Also, you must recognize that Wving Tschxung has trapping! and chain punches!

Where else can you find trapping? I'll tell you, nowhere. You might as well give up looking, you'll never find it, especially not the super duper secret herbal formula as taught by only a handful of people on earth. Sure, it's supposed to be a simple art, but there's secret stuff in there. Like trapping!

Did I mention they have trapping?

No one else in the whole frikkin world has trapping. I can tell you that. I've fought them all, and they haven't a clue what trapping is, because they don't know the secret trapping schpiel.

Also, they have magic, except they call it chi sao. This is totally unlike anything else in the world, even similar things are completely different than chi sau.

Yes, it's a magical system, practice it long enough and you'll be able to walk on water, even when unfrozen.

The other great thing about the system is that it cures cancer, and guarantees your home will be free of bolwevils.

You wouldn't even believe how amazing this system is. I saw a guy challenge a Wving Tschxung stylist, and it was just like Dragon Ball Z, I mean, that was some ****ed up ****, the attacker was screaming "NOT THE TRAPPING!", but it was too late. He was lucky the Wving Tschxung stylist didn't sever his sacrum with his sweet sensitivity.

and other outrageous claims

[Ultimatewingchun]

"The question is why don't we see any WCK fighters fighting at this level? Are there ANY?

I think the system has some great possibilities but if so why aren't we seeing it?"


***WELL you already know what my two cents on that will be, Jim...

Basically everything I just described is an infight from within 2-3 feet of your opponent and then moving in even closer than 2 feet...

which can also mean that you're now in grappling stage perhaps - as well as the challenges of getting to the 2-3 feet proximity without taking punishment that so many wing chun fighters haven't yet solved.

Long range and grappling/clinch range have to be negotiated creatively (ie.- crosstrained?) by the wing chun fighter before you'll ever see any major success in an MMA venue for wing chun, imo.

On the street it's already a proven art for many - since most streetfights will probably go to (or at least pass through) close quarter striking range rather quickly - as opposed to a tournament or MMA type venue.

And even then (on the street) I still would advise some crosstraining for ground and clinch work - although ground-fighting strategy on the street imo must also be modified so that the less amount of time you actually spend on the ground the better, ie.- don't pull guard willingly - and train to get out from the bottom (regardess of what bottom position) and back to your feet as quickly as you can when on the street.

[YungChun]

I think it has more to do with issues outside what is in the system..

Personally I think that the crux of the problem is that guys who want to fight in MMA will not even think about going to a wing chun club.. So you have to have some WCK folks who then choose to go MMA, and there would seem to be oh so few of those, or even those who compete at all.. You would think you would see some run off but not as of yet as far as I know.

On the outside issue you know where I am on that. I place more import on attributes, the ability to time and measure, in which WCK tactics can help.

I don't think there is anything wrong with using boxing esp boxing pad work in training, on the outside; but WCK does have kicking and mega entry moves. Many of the two handed clear/hit and fill/hit moves can also be used for entry, in addition to other entry tactics, like smashing into them and variations of entry on the prep.. In it's purest/highest form I think WCK is about a single intercepting KO...

IMO, it's not that the system is lacking in outside entry work it's that much of the classical training eliminates this work and also eliminates sparring which is where a lot of this skill is picked up.

[Knifefighter]

If you're someone who has never really worked with and understood all that can be gleaned from the forms -

and if you're someone who has failed to glimpse not only the technigues that can come out of working with the wooden dummy but also the use of the dummy as a tool sharpening skill (like punching mitts, bags, and shields) - :

At least with chi sao you are working with a live person. You really don't have to change chi sao too much to make it realistic... use only the positions and techniques that are used in fighting (i.e. get rid of the steering wheel mentality, throw out the dumba$$ backhands to the neck, etc.). It would be more like clinch boxing/pummelling once it became realistic.

You could do the same thing with the Mook Jong. Pad it up enough so that it could be hit full force with your fist and take away the pretend arms (which in no way mimick real arms)... basically make it more like a heavy bag, which is closer to realistic, although not nearly as close as banging with an opponent.

As far as forms, make them more like shadow boxing with no set sequences, no pigeon stances, no twirly little wrist motions.

Make the majority of you training with a live person.

Now you would be looking at more functional training.

[Knifefighter]

The question is why don't we see any WCK fighters fighting at this level? Are there ANY?

Sure... Alan Orr's guys. There was also a guy who used to post here who fought in some of the local matches here.

The thing is, I can guarantee you they are heavily supplementing their standup training with pummelling and boxing type work. When you see their matches, you don't see chi sao type techniques being applied. Their hits look to be more along the lines of what you see coming from boxing training, rather than chi sao, forms or Mook Jong training.

[Knifefighter]

Your thinking shapes again mate. Every person ive sparred with and fought has tried to punch my lights out.

Chi Sao enabled me to not only deal with the blows but also to spot and create spaces for me to land my own blows.

I believe that wasn't from chi sao, but from your sparring and any other more realistic training you may have had.



Chi Sao Does occur in fighting but it certainly does not manifest itself in the form of three repeated actions which is a flawed view anyway.


Maybe you could post a clip of you fighting so you could point out the specific applications from chi sao being performed.

[Knifefighter]

Many of the two handed clear/hit and fill/hit moves can also be used for entry, in addition to other entry tactics, like smashing into them and variations of entry on the prep.

Oh that's right, I forgot to mention, the dumba$$, two hands at the same time junk.... 100% waste of time. Kind of like the time Sakaraba was winning his fight and decided to do his "double karate chop" move... great way to get KTFO.

[Knifefighter]

Basically everything I just described is an infight from within 2-3 feet of your opponent and then moving in even closer than 2 feet...

which can also mean that you're now in grappling stage perhaps - as well as the challenges of getting to the 2-3 feet proximity without taking punishment that so many wing chun fighters haven't yet solved.

So, what is going to be better at dealing with this specific range... boxing, MMA, Muay Thai and grappling which consistently work in this range at 100&#37; full contact with proven training methods and tens of thousands of competitors constantly testing and evolving their methods in this range... or WC in which almost nobody competes and/or fights full contact outside of their schools?

Hmmm... for me it's a no brainer. I'll go with the systems that consistenly prove they are masters of this range.

[sihing]

Trying to make WC into MMA is wrong IMO. One is very different to the other. As to why people that train in WC not competiting in MMA representing the art, who cares, for me I could careless and whether someone from the WC lineage wins or losses in a MMA fight means nothing to me. It's up to the individual to make it work for them. Dale and I could meet up, spar and regardless of who gets the better of the two of us, it has no reflection on the effectiveness of what arts we practice, more so a reflection on how we train as individuals. I represent me, not Wing Chun.

Read my bro's article on this very subject, it's called "Not for sport", http://www.wingchuncoach.com/NotForSport.html , some good insights there:)

James

[Knifefighter]

Read my bro's article on this very subject, it's called "Not for sport", http://www.wingchuncoach.com/NotForSport.html , some good insights there:)

How often in your training do you have your opponents sneak up on you and violently attack you? How often does he do that and keep attacking you even if you fall onto the ground? How often does he try to kick you full force after you are on the ground? How often does he use a weapon in this violent attack? How often do you train this with multiple opponents?

If these things are not being done, then how exactly is one training for street attacks?

While "sports styles" may not deal specifically with "the street", they are consistenly performing one of the most important aspects of what will happen on the street... a 100&#37; fully committed opponent trying to take you out.

People often say that MMA is a sports style and doesn't train for the street. Often, these same people have never been on the ground with an opponent trying to take them out with kicks which is something that happens often on the street. It is also a regular occurrence in MMA. So who is really training more realistically for what can happen in the real world in this case?

[TenTigers]

ya mean, like this?


http://youtube.com/watch?v=yacFkXt82YM

[sihing]

How often in your training do you have your opponents sneak up on you and violently attack you? How often does he do that and keep attacking you even if you fall onto the ground? How often does he try to kick you full force after you are on the ground? How often does he use a weapon in this violent attack? How often do you train this with multiple opponents?

If these things are not being done, then how exactly is one training for street attacks?

While "sports styles" may not deal specifically with "the street", they are consistenly performing one of the most important aspects of what will happen on the street... a 100&#37; fully committed opponent trying to take you out.

People often say that MMA is a sports style and doesn't train for the street. Often, these same people have never been on the ground with an opponent trying to take them out with kicks which is something that happens often on the street. It is also a regular occurrence in MMA. So who is really training more realistically for what can happen in the real world in this case?

Obviously to you Dale MMA does, with your unbias opinions and all, lol..


For me, what I get out of the article has nothing to do with techniques or scenerio thinking, but more of a mindset. My goal on the street is to destroy the person attacking me, not score points, go for a knockout or submit him. To deny these things are not the goal of a competition is foolish. If the ring and the street are the same then why are there rules, restrictions, ref's, doctors, corner men, etc etc for the ring. Just imagine what would be happening with today's MMA fighters if they fought with the rules of the 1st one. IMO there is a big difference btwn the two, but that's just me:) Now does that mean MMA guys can't fight in the street? Of course not, but that is not their primary reason for training. Watch the Human Weapon espisode on Krav Maga, one of the host is a MMA fighter (not that he represents the whole MMA community). From what I can see he learned alot about the difference btwn comp fighting and self defence.


James

[Knifefighter]

For me, what I get out of the article has nothing to do with techniques or scenerio thinking, but more of a mindset. My goal on the street is to destroy the person attacking me, not score points, go for a knockout or submit him.

Are you saying a sport fighter cannot change his mindset from the sporting atmosphere of the ring to the more brutal aspect of the street, but you can somehow manage to change your mindset from the cooperative, friendly based atmosphere of your training studio into that of the street more easily?

My thinking is that the guy who competes against relative strangers who are going has hard as they can to take him out will have a much easier time switching mindsets than the friendly-based training guys when it is necessary to do so.



If the ring and the street are the same then why are there rules, restrictions, ref's, doctors, corner men, etc etc for the ring.

The street and the ring are different. Just as your training studio and the street are different. The ring, however, is probably a closer approximation to the intensity of the street than your training studio.



IMO there is a big difference btwn the two, but that's just me:)

You are right. Today's MMA is much more watered down than the first couple of UFC's or Vale Tudo matches in Brazil. It is still closer to the intensity of the street than most training studios.



Watch the Human Weapon espisode on Krav Maga, one of the host is a MMA fighter (not that he represents the whole MMA community). From what I can see he learned alot about the difference btwn comp fighting and self defence.

That episode was a complete sham. Take a look at that scene where the KM "expert" tells him he has no self-defense skills when he has trouble defending against the knife. Then compare that to the scenes of the KM students sparring. Notice how they spar pretty much like MMA fighters and are not even considering a knife in the mix. Throw a knife into that mix and those guys are just as clueless about how to defend as he was.

Here's a test that you can easily do to see how dumba$$ their knife techniques are. Rewatch the episode and practice doing the knife defenses they showed on there. Then grab one of your training partners (he doesn't even have to have any knife training). Give him a dowel or training blade and tell him his goal is to try as hard as he can to stab you as many times as he can. Then try out their "knife defense" and see how well it doesn't work.

[TenTigers]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=h_vvI26NnwE

[YungChun]

Oh that's right, I forgot to mention, the dumba$$, two hands at the same time junk.... 100&#37; waste of time. Kind of like the time Sakaraba was winning his fight and decided to do his "double karate chop" move... great way to get KTFO.
I don't know about the two-handed karate chop move...

But I know boxers who work taking the jab on their rear hand and hitting with the other.. This kind of movement is similar to a move the guy who was mainly a boxer from, I think, the first Ultimate Fighter I saw drilling/using the same move.. The move is simply a catch type or sliding action using the rear hand/arm as you hit with the other, used as an entry <footwork>..

I have also worked with boxers I know who have said they have used or been caught by other boxers with this kind of move, off their jab. I have used this on a couple of boxers I know as well in sparring. Another boxing variation similar to WCK actions IMO is punching over or under the jab, with or without use of the other hand, which is not all that much different, save using two hands/arms.. IMO there are WCK variations of those actions, or essentially the same actions in WCK but also the idea of clashing, jamming, unbalancing, etc, using two arms/hands, one to smother/clinch/catch/jam and the other to hit—this is fundamental to WCK..

Now, I think any given technique has a range of effectiveness—how well it can be done will come down to how well your timing, use of position is, how fast you are and so on, with respect to your opponent. The slower he jabs, the faster you are, the better your timing, etc. will define what "works" for anyone and what “doesn’t work”—but use of the center, the fastest line and using two hands/arms is used to supplement natural attributes.

[sihing]

Are you saying a sport fighter cannot change his mindset from the sporting atmosphere of the ring to the more brutal aspect of the street, but you can somehow manage to change your mindset from the cooperative, friendly based atmosphere of your training studio into that of the street more easily?

Yes and No. Of course they can learn it just like anyone else, but if you are not training for an environment with rules, you will not be as prepared as someone that is. Remember, we are not talking about some guy calling you out to the back alley to have at it. More or less we are talking about surprise attacks, unexpected things in unfamilar places. Didn't Cro Cop just say before the last event, that not training & fighting in a cage made a big difference when he got KO'd in his second last fight? When it's real it can be anywhere. The problem I see in the UFC/MMA scene is that it is getting very specialized. Nothing is specialized on the street

My thinking is that the guy who competes against relative strangers who are going has hard as they can to take him out will have a much easier time switching mindsets than the friendly-based training guys when it is necessary to do so.

Who says I can't do that either in a more realistic environment (I'm not saying I do, just posing a question). Didn't Cro Cop say he didn't train for elbows in his second last fight, and that is part of the reason why he got clocked with them, leading to a KO?


The street and the ring are different. Just as your training studio and the street are different. The ring, however, is probably a closer approximation to the intensity of the street than your training studio.

Agreed, if all you do in the studio is kung fu movies stuff, you will have nothing. I also agree that the ring is as close as you can get regarding "intensitiy" but IMO intensity is not the thing I am thinking about, more about environment and circumstances (inclosed dark place with multiple opponents in close range and you don't know what the fu(k is going on) Again I'm not stating I am there yet, as this isn't about me, but about situations.


You are right. Today's MMA is much more watered down than the first couple of UFC's or Vale Tudo matches in Brazil. It is still closer to the intensity of the street than most training studios.

see above




That episode was a complete sham. Take a look at that scene where the KM "expert" tells him he has no self-defense skills when he has trouble defending against the knife. Then compare that to the scenes of the KM students sparring. Notice how they spar pretty much like MMA fighters and are not even considering a knife in the mix. Throw a knife into that mix and those guys are just as clueless about how to defend as he was.

Of course you think it is a sham, because it doesn't support your cause. My belief regarding knife fighting is a bit different than what they do as well, but taking a guy down when he has a knife is a no no in my book. Also from what I understand, most MMA guys don't train against the knife, I'm sure there are some but why would they, since they will never face a knife in the ring?

Here's a test that you can easily do to see how dumba$$ their knife techniques are. Rewatch the episode and practice doing the knife defenses they showed on there. Then grab one of your training partners (he doesn't even have to have any knife training). Give him a dowel or training blade and tell him his goal is to try as hard as he can to stab you as many times as he can. Then try out their "knife defense" and see how well it doesn't work.

I don't care who you are, fighting against a knife is always a losing situation, unless you are dam lucky and wearing tough clothing, you will get cut for sure. For me I'd definetly run unless I had no choice and had to take my chances



James............

[Knifefighter]

Yes and No. Of course they can learn it just like anyone else, but if you are not training for an environment with rules, you will not be as prepared as someone that is. Remember, we are not talking about some guy calling you out to the back alley to have at it. More or less we are talking about surprise attacks, unexpected things in unfamilar places.

How exactly does doing chi sao and Mook Jong work prepare you for a surprise attack?




Agreed, if all you do in the studio is kung fu movies stuff, you will have nothing. I also agree that the ring is as close as you can get regarding "intensitiy" but IMO intensity is not the thing I am thinking about, more about environment and circumstances (inclosed dark place with multiple opponents in close range and you don't know what the fu(k is going on) Again I'm not stating I am there yet, as this isn't about me, but about situations.

Situational training for SD is great, especially if you use the MMA approach of training for all ranges including the ground and sparring.



Of course you think it is a sham, because it doesn't support your cause.

Not because it doesn't support my cause, but because, after 30 years of knife work, I know B.S when I see it.


but taking a guy down when he has a knife is a no no in my book.

Do a search for various videos showing knife attacks. You will see that most of them end up on the ground. The fact is that fending off a knife will almost always necessitate some type of grappling, often on the ground.



I don't care who you are, fighting against a knife is always a losing situation, unless you are dam lucky and wearing tough clothing, you will get cut for sure. For me I'd definetly run unless I had no choice and had to take my chances

During most knife attacks, one usually doesn't have a chance to run. Knife attacks are even more of a surprise type attack than is a normal unarmed street altercation. A person with a knife usually doesn't pull it out and spin it around before trying to rip you with it. He does it when you are in an enclosed space and/or not ready.

[YungChun]

The fighter that fights the hardest, all other things being equal, is going to have the best chances in fighting, on the street or in the Ring.. Training 'for real' with 'deadly techniques' that are done with no contact are no more useful than sport techniques with contact.. Those using contact and learning to apply their power are ahead of the fake technique people.. The rest of the training, scenarios and street awareness, tactics, force continuum, are important for anyone regardless of style..

Attacks in the street are normally assaults.. Attacks in the Ring are more technical, unless you have two MMA folks fighting in the street, you have a different animal.. Assaults use a different method of attack and different kind of attack seen in competition.. The latest research talks about fighting in full contact venues against other trained fighters as being much more difficult than fighting some punk on the street who is trying to sucker you into a setup for an attack..

Not that hard to see that IMO, but this doesn't address multiples, edged weapons and so on.. The problems in the street are just different than those in the Ring for the most part. Training scenarios and being street smart can go a long way for anyone.. But again the fighter who fights will be a better fighter, will be a better fighter, will be a better fighter.

[Knifefighter]

Not that hard to see that IMO, but this doesn't address multiples, edged weapons and so on..

The Dog Brothers are a good example of how to put the MMA approach and street together. Lots of multiple oppoents, blunt and edged weapons; all ranges and full contact fighting.