Should Terrence be banned and why [Archive]

t_niehoff

11-07-2007, 02:02 PM

No.

I confess to deriving pleasure from watching him repeatedly stuffing his foot in his mouth up to the knee and betraying his plethora of personality flaws in public.

You can't accuse him of stirring up real trouble, he runs and hides whenever anyone suggests he post a vid or do anything outside of running off at the mouth in cyberspace.

Hey, dude, thanks for the support! I'm going to go watch those vids you and Victor have up while I meditate on my personality flaws, like my penchant for calling people names, ;)

k gledhill

11-07-2007, 02:07 PM

theres no 'hang 'em' button ;)

JGTevo

11-07-2007, 02:10 PM

I vote for settling it Battle Royale style :D

UKBBC

11-07-2007, 03:12 PM

Why don't you create a sticky thread just for Terence? Collate all his postings into that one thread, and include a link to that thread in ALL new threads. That way, there is no need for repeated postings of the same things on every thread.

Time will be saved for everyone that way. Terence will have his opinions immortalized, and for everyone else, if you've read it before, you don't need to read it again, and you can refer to his thread and think twice before posting.

EASY

JGTevo

11-07-2007, 03:15 PM

If there weren't three "No" options, this race would be dead even :rolleyes:

Liddel

11-07-2007, 03:28 PM

Hell no,

It easier to ignore those you dont want to hear, he has the right just like the rest of us to post here....

Plus every time a new person comes here to converse, its always a blast reading thier first posts with T.... its like our own forum initiation....:rolleyes:

Survive the baptism of fire and you have earnt the right to post. LOL.

:cool:
DREW

forever young

11-07-2007, 03:47 PM

Hello,

Well I decided it would be interesting to see what the majority of people think. Since it seems some feel I ignore the majority of people and that most of the forum members would like to see Terrence banned I thought a pole would be one way to test the waters so to speak.

at least he can spell !!!! its poll and terence :rolleyes: :D and i feel that while he can (and does) repeatedly make the same points, i personally feel they are true and valid points and if he gets just one person to train in an alive manner or test their stuff under full resistance or even just gets people thinking about "teh d34dly' and all the crap that goes with it them he is a better teacher than most.
from an impartial observer point of view its funny how many people actually bash T (as he seems to be affectionately known) while seemingly espousing the same mantras themselves (or at least in general agreeing with the main points with which he makes........ repeatedly :D) so no ban as censorship and media control is how saddam and hitler got away with murder and my world is richer for reading "The Wing Chun World According To Terence" or "How Wing Chun Should Be" by mr niehoff.
thank you and good night

anerlich

11-07-2007, 03:48 PM

I'm going to go watch those vids you and Victor have up,

That won't take you long, I don't have any vids up. No one's asking me to provide evidence I can back up anything I preach, or prove that the approaches I advocate repeatedly have actually done anything for my skills - unlike yourself.

while I meditate on my personality flaws, like my penchant for calling people names,

I wouldn't if I were you, you'll have no time left over to post, eat, sleep, go and train with / lecture / suck up to good fighters, or anything else. In your case, life is far too short to undertake so mammoth a task.

You did come up with theoreticians, grandmothers (thanks, Dale), etc., yeah, so trying to rein in that penchant is a good idea, though that's only one of your many issues, and probably not the highest priority.

he is a better teacher than most

Jeez, you must have had a terrible run of luck with teachers.

With 65 posts, you haven't been here long enough to truly appreciate how often those views/rants get repeatedly posted. The posts are redundant and derivative, but so awed is T with his own opinions that he seems to think that somehow they are fresh and newly relevant every time they get posted.

If you like 'his' views, I can tell you the people he's parroting say them so much better and more succinctly than he. Getting them from him is like listening to Benny Hinn when you could be conversing directly with God.

He'll get to you and in your face as well, it's only a matter of time. Trust me.

BTW, you should have used a capital T on Terence, Saddam, Hitler, and in several other places, and used a few commas in your sentences. Multiple exclamation marks used for emphasis are not good writing.

Such matters seem to concern you and you feel the need to point the mod's errors out - so I'm just trying to help while we are all pointing out each other's faults :D

Knifefighter

11-07-2007, 03:58 PM

How could you even think about banning the guy who came up with the term "WC grandmothers"?

Sihing73

11-07-2007, 04:03 PM

I appoligize to everyone for my terrible spelling :o. I also appoligize to what's his name for spelling it wrong ;) Sorry, Terence.

Oh and forver young, Pole is a correct spelling although not for this thread. A good Wing Chunner learns to think out of the box and cover his/her own faults. I just have'nt gotten to being good yet, but I am hopeful :D

I also only had one yes because I figured that was enough. Maybe I should have only gone with two options but I fail to see how this would be "dead even".

Dan_chi_sau

11-07-2007, 04:20 PM

Dan_chi_sau

11-07-2007, 04:23 PM

and before anyone suggests I'm backing t, I'm not. I disagree with some of his spiels, but he's not the only one who rants on here 10 times a day.

Edmund

11-07-2007, 05:09 PM

David,

LOL.

I wonder why you even bothered with this poll. Doesn't seem like you are going to do anything regardless of the result.

You already biased the poll by stating all these reasons for a "no" vote: "freedom of speech", "he posts the same stuff all the time" and "right to have an opinion".

None of those reasons are *valid* reasons not to ban someone:
"Freedom of Speech" is about the government not being able to censor people. This is a forum not a government. There's no requirement that the forum provide Terence with a place to post his arrogant BS repeatedly.

Plus there's plenty of other forums for Terence to do that. So his freedom of speech isn't being taken away at all!

If he posts the same stuff all the time (which he does a lot IMO), then that is a REAL good reason to ban him. Doing it on every thread disrupts the threads. This is just classic trolling. If Terence just posts some abuse of some guy's lineage or teacher to get an argument going, it's a troll post. He's done it plenty of times. I don't think I've seen you post a warning. So as far as I can see, trolling goes unmoderated by you.

Those sorts of things are reasons to ban someone.

His posts are just noise reducing the amount of discussion on the forum. He's hasn't contributed a useful post ever. He flames other people's stand-up and says he's good enough to spot correct technique. Yet people ask to see him doing a thing and he's a ghost.

Vajramusti

11-07-2007, 05:12 PM

What good does it do.

A moderator's time is limited but normally a moderators (root=moderate)role in discussions should/does include
keeping the discussions on track and reasonably civil.

Short of that, ignoring some folks consistently has always been a rational route.The problem is that some folks like and enjoy the chaos untill it bites back at them.

Dont chase hands and dont chase trolls.

I didnt vote in the poll.

joy chaudhuri

anerlich

11-07-2007, 05:19 PM

Edmund makes a good point. KFO is not obligated to allow anyone to join or post. The right to free speech does not apply AFAIK/IANAL.

Hypothetically, it would be interesting to see what happened if T were banned and then tried to sue on such a basis. Probably not as much fun for anyone if it actually happened.

His posts are just noise reducing the amount of discussion on the forum. He's hasn't contributed a useful post ever.

That's a bit unfair. There was one post he made on the WCML back in 1999 ...

Dave has banned people, but not for a while. Samson (in various incarnations) and Ali Rahim come to mind. Both of them repeatedly made grossly insulting posts about other forum members (Phil Redmond, in those cases).

If non-gross insults were a banning offence, a lot more of us would have been cast into outer darkness by now.

Tom Kagan

11-07-2007, 05:27 PM

Where is Victor's poll?

For that matter, where is my poll?

canglong

11-07-2007, 06:31 PM

Though Terence conduct is compirable to that of trolling we all know him and his mantra so well it has lost its kick. In other words he is like the boy that cried wolf at this point letting him stay is probably the most humane thing this forum can do for him.

Matrix

11-07-2007, 09:03 PM

It would be a huge mistake to ban Terence.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The emotional responses to T's comments seem to touch a nerve. I'm not exactly sure why, but I find it interesting.

Cheers,
Bill

You've gotta fight for your right to party!!
--Beastie Boys

Edmund

11-07-2007, 09:20 PM

Edmund makes a good point. KFO is not obligated to allow anyone to join or post. The right to free speech does not apply AFAIK/IANAL.

Exactly. Terence's rights are completely fine even if he's banned. Even if no forum would have him, he's fully able to create his own on the internet somewhere. :)
Tada! Rights preserved.

I'm all for differing opinions.
But when every thread is the *same* argument going for multiple pages and the original topic is completely left behind, the Ignore function just doesn't cut it.

Threads get uncivil and off-topic real fast making it difficult to participate.

90% of people probably just lurk and don't give a **** anymore.

That's a bit unfair. There was one post he made on the WCML back in 1999 ...

:) Guess I must have blinked and missed it!

Though Terence conduct is compirable to that of trolling we all know him and his mantra so well it has lost its kick. In other words he is like the boy that cried wolf at this point letting him stay is probably the most humane thing this forum can do for him.

Don't see why we have to play nice with him so he can vent his internet personality. How is it helping Terence anyway? Just encourages him to be such an a55hole.

MrBump

11-08-2007, 03:12 AM

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

... although you should probably consider getting a life and not taking what you see on the web too seriously...

Matrix

11-08-2007, 05:41 AM

Don't see why we have to play nice with him so he can vent his internet personality. How is it helping Terence anyway? Just encourages him to be such an a55hole.
Edmund,
One question. Are you 'hgamer' on Youtube?

Bill

sanjuro_ronin

11-08-2007, 05:46 AM

Where is Victor's poll?

For that matter, where is my poll?

You don't know where your poll is ??
:eek:

Matrix

11-08-2007, 05:49 AM

Threads get uncivil and off-topic real fast making it difficult to participate.
Just remember that it takes at least two to get uncivil. In wing chun, do we meet force with more force? No. So applying the same principle, when you see an "uncivil" post, should we try and up the ante? Or would it be better to let it go?

Bill

Matrix

11-08-2007, 05:50 AM

You don't know where your poll is ??
:eek:I think they have a blue pill for that. ;)

Vajramusti

11-08-2007, 06:21 AM

No. Edmund is not hgamer of Youtube.
joy

Knifefighter

11-08-2007, 06:57 AM

nschmelzer

11-08-2007, 07:06 AM

There really is a simple way to shut him up.

Just post video of yourselves doing what you say you can do against some skilled, resisting opponents.

The fact that almost no one can do that speaks volumes.

Sure. That will shut him up. The reality is, that won't shut him up. Nothing short of banning him will. It's not his opinion that is being banned. It is the fact he turns every thread into his pulpit for his "TMA sucks" sermon.

How about this, why doesn't he show US video of HIM showing what he can do against a WC man with more than two years training? Why do we have to prove to him what we can do? Who is he? If he wants to be the punk - he should have the burden of proving he is the man.

(BTW - is he wants video of what I do, and can do, he can PM me. I will give him video of me in exchange for video of him.)

sanjuro_ronin

11-08-2007, 07:11 AM

(BTW - is he wants video of what I do, and can do, he can PM me. I will give him video of me in exchange for video of him.)

this is how internet affairs get started :D

Knifefighter

11-08-2007, 07:13 AM

How about this, why doesn't he show US video of HIM showing what he can do against a WC man with more than two years training? Why do we have to prove to him what we can do? Who is he? If he wants to be the punk - he should have the burden of proving he is the man.

He's not making claims about being able to do anything other than what you would normally see in any MMA fight. You can simply watch a few BJJ/MMA fights to see how he would more than likely fight.

You guys are the ones making the claims about being able to fight a certain way with your WC. The problem is that there seems to be no evidence anywhere to back it up.

Chango

11-08-2007, 07:23 AM

I can't say that Terence is my favorite person on here. But I think anyone who has been here knows he has a case of the alligator mouth and humming bird a$$ syndrome. The only training he does is at his keyboard. So you wouldn't want to take that away from him. He was not satisfied with is experiences with TMA. So now it's his mission in life to attack anything that has to do with it. He would be better recieved in a MMA forum. So I often wonder why he waste his time here. Maybe he does it for attention? Who knows? It's bee proven many times and in many ways he has been asked to put up or shut up and of course he hasn't done either.

So at this point it would be a waste of time and energy to ban him.

Knifefighter

11-08-2007, 07:27 AM

He has been asked many times to put up or shut up and of course he hasn't done either.

Ummm.... who else here has "put up"?

Nobody, other than Alan and Victor.

Again, the fact that so many people are asking this of him, but cannot do the same speaks volumes.

Chango

11-08-2007, 07:37 AM

Ummm.... who else here has "put up"?

Nobody, other than Alan and Victor.

Again, the fact that so many people are asking this of him, but cannot do the same speaks volumes.

It's quite simple! If you don't have an alligator mouth you will not get many invites to put up. This is why he has been asked. I have no issue with meeting people first hand and mixxing things up and backing up what I say. but then again I don't go around down grading others point of view. If someone trains something that is not for me or does not make since. I simply leave it at it not being for me. I see no point in disrespecting them or what they do. So I will agree with you most people on here have not been asked to put up. Simply because they have the comon courtesy of showing mutual respect. uhheemm... I will now step off of my soap box LOL!;)

t_niehoff

11-08-2007, 07:46 AM

There really is a simple way to shut him up.

Just post video of yourselves doing what you say you can do against some skilled, resisting opponents.

The fact that almost no one can do that speaks volumes.

Yes, that fact does speak volumes -- it tells us they can't do it. It's like if I tell you that you can't pass the guard the way you teach it or train it, you can easily refute me by just showing that you can. End of story. How could I continue to say that you couldn't?

I've been "in" WCK for almost 25 years now, and I've seen many of the "masters" and "grandmasters", and I've seen lots of WCK people, and I've seen many WCK videos, read many WCK books, attended many WCK seminars, etc. And for the overwhelming part, they all teach fantasy-based martial art.

What do I mean by fantasy-based martial art. Well, they don't *start* with something they can really do (and really do use) in fighting and then teach that to others (which would be reality-based martial art) -- like they do in the functional martial arts like BJJ for example. They teach things that they don't really do, and have never done in fighting but teach instead from a theoretical perspective (from a concept or idea of what they believe they can do) and then use unrealistic exercises to practice and reinforce these things (so they begin with a fantasy, and that's the base of what they do). And then if they do "spar", you don't see the very things they practice to do come out at all or if they do, very infrequently or not as they train to do them.

I understand why many, many people don't want to hear this -- there is much ego-investment, hero-worship, role-playing, rice-bowl protecting, etc. in WCK. But I'm not saying these things for them. I'm saying them for those people who are actually interested in their performance, who may see some of what I'm talking about, so as to get them to rethink some things, to examine some things, to apply a bullshido standard to WCK, etc. As I wish someone had done for me many years ago. WCK is wrapped in nonsense.

On another note:
As far as posting a vid of me -- my points don't rest on my ability. Anyone with an objective eye who isn't even a WCK practitioner could see what I'm talking about. And all that a vid of me will do is shift the focus to me and my personal level of performance, what I do, etc. That's not the issue here. (Plus, I'm not trying to tell people how to do WCK or to do it like me and I'm not selling anything and I make no money from WCK nor do I claim to be an authority,etc.). What is the issue is whether traditional training produces good results, can people do the things they do as they train to do them in fighting. And this is what I'm trying to keep the focus on.

t_niehoff

11-08-2007, 07:58 AM

It's quite simple! If you don't have an alligator mouth you will not get many invites to put up. This is why he has been asked. I have no issue with meeting people first hand and mixxing things up and backing up what I say. but then again I don't go around down grading others point of view. If someone trains something that is not for me or does not make since. I simply leave it at it not being for me. I see no point in disrespecting them or what they do. So I will agree with you most people on here have not been asked to put up. Simply because they have the comon courtesy of showing mutual respect. uhheemm... I will now step off of my soap box LOL!;)

You look at this from a personal perspective. It's nothing personal. For example, I don't call anyone an "idiot" or "moron" - like people do to me. It's not an issue of respect because views are what are involved. Views. I can respect you as a person and think your views are bizarre, and point that out. How do I point that out? By reference to evidence or the lack of it, by reason, etc. Admittedly, I do go overboard sometimes to amke a point, but why take these things personally?

sihing

11-08-2007, 09:02 AM

You look at this from a personal perspective. It's nothing personal. For example, I don't call anyone an "idiot" or "moron" - like people do to me. It's not an issue of respect because views are what are involved. Views. I can respect you as a person and think your views are bizarre, and point that out. How do I point that out? By reference to evidence or the lack of it, by reason, etc. Admittedly, I do go overboard sometimes to amke a point, but why take these things personally?

I wouldn't ban you from this forum, because like you say, you don't disrespect people on a personal level by calling them immature names, but you do disrespcet them on their beliefs, and sometimes that is even more damaging for people. People take things personally because to them WC is a personal thing. Personally, I've learned that until you have actually met someone face to face and trained or fought with them, you will never know what they are capable of. Your problem is you assume too much by what people write, and think you know their capabilities, that is a grave error if you ask me, and you may be pleasantly surprised by the capabilities of some on this forum that you may classify as TMA. Also, your definition of TMA is different from the definition most of us use, so therefore it is safe to say that you are talking to the wrong crowd:)

James

sanjuro_ronin

11-08-2007, 09:39 AM

Your problem is you assume too much by what people write, and think you know their capabilities, that is a grave error if you ask me, and you may be pleasantly surprised by the capabilities of some on this forum that you may classify as TMA. Also, your definition of TMA is different from the definition most of us use, so therefore it is safe to say that you are talking to the wrong crowd

This needs to be repeated, perhaps over and over.

Nick Forrer

11-08-2007, 09:48 AM

I wouldn't ban you from this forum, because like you say, you don't disrespect people on a personal level by calling them immature names, but you do disrespcet them on their beliefs, and sometimes that is even more damaging for people

The idea of 'disrespecting beliefs' is silly. If you are secure in your beliefs and you can back them up then you should welcome people questioning them as you have nothing to fear from them being scrutinised.

Peoples egos flare up when what they say is questioned because they are ultimately insecure about their beliefs (that is, they know they cant support them with evidence) - same thing as religious dogma.

Of course there is a polite way to do it i.e. one that doesnt involve name calling - but no one is accusing Terence of that.

The most you can accuse him of is being repetitive or unoriginal....but the fact that he has put the same point before or someone else has done so earlier doesnt make it false and as he says he'll stop refuting nonsense when people stop posting nonsense

chusauli

11-08-2007, 10:00 AM

Some of the mental lessons in WCK are:

letting things go

keep things on track

if things don't work, try something else - i.e. disengage

don't involve the ego

let your mind be empty to be able to flow in the situation

live in the moment, not the past, not the future

I am surprised here at the amount of ego investment and the "witch hunt". People have a right to speak their mind, just as advertisers have a right to interrupt with commercials. You can simply choose to ignore things. I read what Terence has wrote, and if I were fully identified with TMA, I might be offended, but, I have complete respect for good fighters and I know my own abilities.

I see a lot of pain bodies in Martial arts - traditional or otherwise. For an art that is supposed to shed the falsenesss of ego and claims of Chan/Zen, I see a bunch of lip service to. All can get caught, but we need a reminder to come into the present.

What did your WCK teach you guys? Identify your ego? Protect it at all costs?

That's real lame, if so.

Just my opinion.

sihing

11-08-2007, 10:01 AM

The most you can accuse him of is being repetitive or unoriginal....but the fact that he has put the same point before or someone else has done so earlier doesnt make it false and as he says he'll stop refuting nonsense when people stop posting nonsense

So then T has become the self appointed Wing Chun police? I find that funny, but if he wants to assume that role, that's fine with me, he is free to do whatever makes him happy, and obviously repeating himself over and over and over again is what makes him happy:)

Just to add something in, I do agree with T on lots of what he says. To me he is the BS meter for this forum, that is good as we all need to check ourselves from time to time. It is just the repetition of it that is bothersome at times, but like many have said previously, 1) you can't take it too seriously, not all of us are going to agree all the time, 2) you can simply just ignore what he says if it is something you do not agree with, 3) this is just a internet forum, not a place to reveal some truth. Truth is only revealed within each of us individually, and not as a group. Wing Chun is not alive, but we are and are the only beings that can make it alive. As Bruce said, no one system is more important than the people that practice it.

James

Chango

11-08-2007, 10:30 AM

Come on man, It's clear he is MMA er wing chun convert. He simply should let go and move on and maybe go to a MMA forum. But hey maybe he's trapped by his past! LOL!

But I'm sure that would be to Chan or TMA for him LOL!

t_niehoff

11-08-2007, 10:45 AM

So then T has become the self appointed Wing Chun police? I find that funny, but if he wants to assume that role, that's fine with me, he is free to do whatever makes him happy, and obviously repeating himself over and over and over again is what makes him happy:)

I'm not a self-apointed anything -- I'm just a student of the game, as we all are, who comes on a forum to discuss WCK. But I don't accept things on faith or belief but require evidence and reason and use my critical thinking skills.

That doesn't make me the thought police either (people who try to ban othershave that distinction).

Just to add something in, I do agree with T on lots of what he says. To me he is the BS meter for this forum, that is good as we all need to check ourselves from time to time. It is just the repetition of it that is bothersome at times, but like many have said previously, 1) you can't take it too seriously, not all of us are going to agree all the time, 2) you can simply just ignore what he says if it is something you do not agree with, 3) this is just a internet forum, not a place to reveal some truth. Truth is only revealed within each of us individually, and not as a group. Wing Chun is not alive, but we are and are the only beings that can make it alive. As Bruce said, no one system is more important than the people that practice it.

James

That's a good and healthy perspective.

duende

11-08-2007, 10:50 AM

To be honest, I actually would never ever think to want to Ban someone. I strongly believe in free speach and appreciate differences of opinions.

But that has long past in Terence's regard. I'm sorry to say that the hard truth is that any thread he participates in, is soon inundated with his posts full sly remarks and backhanded compliments...

There can be no communication exchange or knowledge shared in this manner.

In truth, it is Terence himself that needs to find peace.

I voted for Banning him, but actually I would prefer only a temporary ban. In hope that he takes a chill and realizes that it's not his message that is probablematic. It is the delivery method.

Heck we all have are quirks. No one is perfect, but one person should not have the power to ruin a community such as this, without some kind of consequence.

This forum was meant for fun and enjoyment for us all... not just be a venue for mindless repitition, accusations, and assumptions by a single person.

t_niehoff

11-08-2007, 11:10 AM

The idea of 'disrespecting beliefs' is silly. If you are secure in your beliefs and you can back them up then you should welcome people questioning them as you have nothing to fear from them being scrutinised.

Moreover, IMO we should all be continually examining and questioning our own -- as well as other people's -- beliefs, evaluating them in light of evidence and reason. This is the process that leads us toward truth.

Peoples egos flare up when what they say is questioned because they are ultimately insecure about their beliefs (that is, they know they cant support them with evidence) - same thing as religious dogma.

I think that is a large part of it.

Of course there is a polite way to do it i.e. one that doesnt involve name calling - but no one is accusing Terence of that.

My personal style of communication, in person (as Robert and Rene can attest) and on the net, is pretty much the same. I'm direct, straight-forward, call-em-as-I-see-em, and confrontational. If I think something is BS, I'll call it BS. I won't sugar-coat it. I should be nicer (as my wife constantly reminds me). It's one of my faults. On the other hand, I take all of this very lightly and not very seriously (and it makes me laugh that others do!).

The most you can accuse him of is being repetitive or unoriginal....but the fact that he has put the same point before or someone else has done so earlier doesnt make it false and as he says he'll stop refuting nonsense when people stop posting nonsense

And as I've said -- yes I'm repetitive because the nonsense is repeated. Yes, I'm not original. I never claimed that my views were. They are pretty standard within the functional martial art community.

JPinAZ

11-08-2007, 11:19 AM

I'm not a self-apointed anything -- I'm just a student of the game, as we all are, who comes on a forum to discuss WCK. But I don't accept things on faith or belief but require evidence and reason and use my critical thinking skills.

That doesn't make me the thought police either (people who try to ban othershave that distinction).

You claim to be a student, but you pass yourself off as a teacher on this forum again and again.

One would think you'd accept things based on how you've improved your FIGHTING skills. But I guess you alone can just think and reason yourself into being a better fighter...
IMO, you're the most clueless on this forum, regardless your views. Why? Because you couldn't prove WC works for you and by admitedly low skill, can't prove anything else you preach works for you. But here you are trying to prove to us 'Wing Chunners' how wrong, and unskillful we all must be... All based on YOUR lack of skills and experience, not ours. How very funny indeed!

I say let him stay, at least it's a good laugh to tune into the 'TN MMA Gospel Hour' in the WC forum here during my breaks at work..

JPinAZ

11-08-2007, 11:20 AM

t_niehoff

11-08-2007, 11:45 AM

You claim to be a student, but you pass yourself off as a teacher on this forum again and again.

Where?

One would think you'd accept things based on how you've improved your FIGHTING skills. But I guess you alone can just think and reason yourself into being a better fighter...

As I have repeatedly said, I'm explicitly not using myself as some standard. To do that, even if I was the best WCK fighter (and I'm NOT), wouldn't be sound reasoning. I have continually said that we need to look to those people who are getting really good results in their training -- to the evidence. And if we do that, we see the same process at work. That all good, proven fighters and fight trainers use that same general process just tweaked for their own method. And, I've pointed to the lack of results with the tradtitional training model.

IMO, you're the most clueless on this forum, regardless your views. Why? Because you couldn't prove WC works for you and by admitedly low skill, can't prove anything else you preach works for you. But here you are trying to prove to us 'Wing Chunners' how wrong, and unskillful we all must be...
All based on YOUR lack of skills and experience..

You keep wanting to make this personal.

My view is that we are only as good as our training. And our fighting skills, our ability to use our WCK tools (strategy, tactics, techniques, concepts, etc.) will correspond to how much quality time we practice using them under realistic conditions, quality sparring or realistic drills (which are snippets of quality sparring). Or to put it anothe way, to develop good fighting skill we need to train like MMAists. Not necessarily to do exactly what they do, but train like they do.

A great example of that is with what Marc Denny (Dog Brother) is doing with silat. Silat in many ways is like WCK, a TMA, with poor training methods, wrapped up in a lot of nonsense, with stories, legends, etc. He's took it down to a MMA gym, began training with those guys, trying to figure out how to really make it work, training his silat in that crucible, and began to figure some things out. His video, Kali Tudo (according to him, kali and silat are one) reflectshis experiences. What he didn't do is take the word of "the world's deadliest mad", deThours. He looked to evidence.

sanjuro_ronin

11-08-2007, 01:02 PM

A great example of that is with what Marc Denny (Dog Brother) is doing with silat. Silat in many ways is like WCK, a TMA, with poor training methods, wrapped up in a lot of nonsense, with stories, legends, etc. He's took it down to a MMA gym, began training with those guys, trying to figure out how to really make it work, training his silat in that crucible, and began to figure some things out. His video, Kali Tudo (according to him, kali and silat are one) reflectshis experiences. What he didn't do is take the word of "the world's deadliest mad", deThours. He looked to evidence.

Have you seen the Kali tudo video ?

k gledhill

11-08-2007, 01:32 PM

is he gone yet ? i cant take that , ' we must fight fighters who are really good, really, to become really good er...really " :rolleyes:

Edmund

11-08-2007, 02:13 PM

Edmund,
One question. Are you 'hgamer' on Youtube?

Bill

No but I know who you're talking about.

I believe his name is Ed as well.
I think he's in Chicago.

I'm in Australia.

Just remember that it takes at least two to get uncivil. In wing chun, do we meet force with more force? No. So applying the same principle, when you see an "uncivil" post, should we try and up the ante? Or would it be better to let it go?

Bill

I let go of plenty personally. But it's obvious to me that the threads go off track and uncivil regardless of what I can do on my own. That's why it needs some moderator intervention.

I consider it purposefully disruptive behaviour. I don't see how turning the other cheek helps discourage that. He hasn't gotten sick of doing it for a few years. I don't think he's going to ease up or modify his behaviour.

In WC, do we just let some guy attack us? I think we generally beat his head in. :)

In a real life social setting, you'd be doing your best to try ditch this guy from your group of aquaintances. LOL. Tell him we're all meeting at one bar and then heading to another!

(That isn't screwing up his Freedom of Speech is it?)

sihing

11-08-2007, 02:19 PM

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;814879]Moreover, IMO we should all be continually examining and questioning our own -- as well as other people's -- beliefs, evaluating them in light of evidence and reason. This is the process that leads us toward truth. /QUOTE]

Agreed, but I would delete the word "question", to me that means you have doubt about your method. If you have doubt, then all the training in the world will do you no good when the s h i t hits the fan. Examining is good, and always striving for improvement, in yourself and your method, is good as well, because perfection is not the goal as it implies that you stop progressing. Also, since we are not in personal contact with one another here, it is impossible for us to examine for real what we are talking about. On this forum there is no personal contact, just us typing fast behind a keyboard. This limits our understanding of one another and what we can actually discuss and evaluate. All we can do here is discuss the concepts, theories, principles and our own "individual" experiences (knowing full well that our experiences are not always absolute truth to everyone else). One of the reasons why I like WC is simply to me it is about concepts, body mechanics and training methods, not about doctrine and definitive answers to combat questions. Combat is too unpredictable to have absolute answers for it, you need something that can teach you to adapt but be easily used in most all situations for everday folk, that don't have the ambition or desire to train like a professional athlete.

James

anerlich

11-08-2007, 02:39 PM

He's not making claims about being able to do anything other than what you would normally see in any MMA fight.

So what? He should then be able to prove those claims by providing the evidence you demand of everyone else below.

You guys are the ones making the claims about being able to fight a certain way with your WC. The problem is that there seems to be no evidence anywhere to back it up.

I'm not making any claims about anything, other than that the incessant crap coming out of T's keyboard is a waste of electrons. If he comes on here and acts like an obnoxious D0rk, he should expect to be treated like one.

anerlich

11-08-2007, 02:44 PM

For example, I don't call anyone an "idiot" or "moron" - like people do to me. It's not an issue of respect because views are what are involved.

So "Grandmothers" and "theoreticians" are compliments?

anerlich

11-08-2007, 02:46 PM

In hope that he takes a chill and realizes that it's not his message that is probablematic. It is the delivery method.

Bingo! Exactly right.

anerlich

11-08-2007, 02:50 PM

name calling - but no one is accusing Terence of that.

I am!

Speak for yourself.

Matrix

11-08-2007, 08:30 PM

No but I know who you're talking about.

I believe his name is Ed as well.
I think he's in Chicago.

I'm in Australia.Well that would be a rather long commute, wouldn't it. :)Thanks for clearing that up for me.

In WC, do we just let some guy attack us? I think we generally beat his head in. :)But if his attacks can't even touch me, or even if they do they have no power, I might just walk away.

In a real life social setting, you'd be doing your best to try ditch this guy from your group of aquaintances. LOL. Tell him we're all meeting at one bar and then heading to another!I can't say that for sure. I've never met him. I've found that when you meet people in person that they tend to be quite different than their on-line persona.