What Wing Chun has taught me

[WaveWingChun]

In a previous thread I got this exchange:

In some sense it is, however, I've learned that once you engage me, I'm going to do what it takes to hurt you bad. If that means I bite you, gouge your eyes out, kick your spine... whatever I have to do. That is obviously not legal in UFC. .


Oh brother...

I wanted to both defend and elaborate on my comment, because I think it's a good topic. One of the main things that Wing Chun has taught me is that fighting is not a pretty thing. If someone is willing to fight you, they are probably willing to hurt you. No matter your skill level, you have the possiblity of getting hurt. In a bare knuckle deal you will most likely get hit. If someone pulls a knife, your chances of getting cut are probably around 99.9% no matter your skill level. So Wing Chun has taught me that I need to follow the principles to protect myself, and also do whatever it takes to protect myself. People may laugh at that, but I have a wife and kids. If I am backed into a corner and can't get away, I will do what I have to do to return to my family. I also think it's important to treat any fight as a serious life or death deal. You have to be committed to do anything because your opponent will do anything. UFC doesn't really reflect that reality because of the tap out and the padded mat. So, to sum up: Wing Chun has taught me to avoid fights at any cost, but once I have no alternative, then I have to go 100%. It's also why I believe in crosstraining between Wing Chun and concealed and carry firearm.

[WaveWingChun]

Some may say that gouging eyes or the like are just "dirty tricks" and why study Wing Chun. Well, why learn a curveball if you have a 105 mph fastball? Why have an alarm on your home if you have a gun? I say cover all your bases. In a fight the end result is what matters. I study Wing Chun for the art and for the ability to protect myself, but that doesn't cancel out everything else.

[sanjuro_ronin]

You do realize that the early days of No Holds Barred allowed eye gouges and such right?

[WaveWingChun]

You do realize that the early days of No Holds Barred allowed eye gouges and such right?

Yes. However, they changed it. Plus, you are grappling on a padded mat. I'm not putting down UFC. Just saying it doesn't reflect what can happen in back alley reality. It shouldn't reflect reality because it's competition and you have to protect people in competition. I'm also not saying that you can't get your butt whomped in UFC, you can. But if you wanted to do back alley reality, you would have UFC on asphalt surrounded by park benches and brick. Grappling on asphalt is a bit different than grappling on pads. My point about UFC is only that you can't say that a particular MA, namely WC, is bad because it isn't really used in UFC. UFC is geared for grappling. Any groundwork in WC is geared to get you off the ground as quickly as possible.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yes. However, they changed it. Plus, you are grappling on a padded mat. I'm not putting down UFC. Just saying it doesn't reflect what can happen in back alley reality. It shouldn't reflect reality because it's competition and you have to protect people in competition. I'm also not saying that you can't get your butt whomped in UFC, you can. But if you wanted to do back alley reality, you would have UFC on asphalt surrounded by park benches and brick. Grappling on asphalt is a bit different than grappling on pads. My point about UFC is only that you can't say that a particular MA, namely WC, is bad because it isn't really used in UFC. UFC is geared for grappling. Any groundwork in WC is geared to get you off the ground as quickly as possible.

Personally, I think WC has quite a bit to offer, that said, like many MA, one must value what it is and discount what it is not.
As someone that has have the fun of grappling on the ground, though not be desire, I can say that its i snot the huge factor some make it out to be.
But this is not about grappling per say, nor the issue of surface or rules.
Its about what WC has taught a given individual.

What have I gotten from my limited time in WC?
As controversial as it may sound, trapping.

[RGVWingChun]

I love it already. Wing Chun has certainly taught me the same things: Win at all cost! The other day I was invited to participate in an MMA program and boy was it boring!!! I stuck around afterward with a friend who was in charge of coordinating the program and showed him the difference between wing chun and mma. The one thing that I made clear was the wing chun is not a game - its not a sport or for entertainment like UFC, etc....no disrespect to those practitioners, but lets face it, the rules of those competitions are what make it entertainment. Out in the streets, there are no rules, and its not for a title or to move on to the next round, etc....it could be for your life or somebody elses. Gotta do what you have to do and wing chun gives you the tools to do just that.

Moses

[Ali. R]

The ability too more adapted to others dispositions, feelings and culture, by simply feeling their true intent (heart) through their energies, and understanding them as human beings first and then as people that I’ve grown too understand and trust… Something in which I received through their intent or energies (heart)…


Ali Rahim.

[SAAMAG]

In a previous thread I got this exchange:

In some sense it is, however, I've learned that once you engage me, I'm going to do what it takes to hurt you bad. If that means I bite you, gouge your eyes out, kick your spine... whatever I have to do. That is obviously not legal in UFC. .


Oh brother...

I wanted to both defend and elaborate on my comment, because I think it's a good topic. One of the main things that Wing Chun has taught me is that fighting is not a pretty thing. If someone is willing to fight you, they are probably willing to hurt you. No matter your skill level, you have the possiblity of getting hurt. In a bare knuckle deal you will most likely get hit. If someone pulls a knife, your chances of getting cut are probably around 99.9% no matter your skill level. So Wing Chun has taught me that I need to follow the principles to protect myself, and also do whatever it takes to protect myself. People may laugh at that, but I have a wife and kids. If I am backed into a corner and can't get away, I will do what I have to do to return to my family. I also think it's important to treat any fight as a serious life or death deal. You have to be committed to do anything because your opponent will do anything. UFC doesn't really reflect that reality because of the tap out and the padded mat. So, to sum up: Wing Chun has taught me to avoid fights at any cost, but once I have no alternative, then I have to go 100%. It's also why I believe in crosstraining between Wing Chun and concealed and carry firearm.


A couple of tidbits aside, I agree with you that the reality of the situation is grim when truly dealing with an assualt, and I like the fact that you recognize that guns and martial arts are both necessary pieces of training like a warrior. The samurai didn't give up their swords in lieu of the gun, but rather added to the gun to their repotoire of tools so that they could be fully prepared for their "modern" times.

Tidbits I didn't agree with or saw things somewhat differently:

Any legitimate system of fighting should teach it's practitioners to go 100% in a real situation--WC or not. And the notion that UFC isn't realistic simply because of the tapout and mat are pretty ridiculous; considering in "real life" submission holds can simply be killing moves done in a split second. The mat makes little difference except in how you get to the ground, or how your opponent gets to the ground. To say the mat is a non-realistic factor is to say that a runner isn't fast in real life because he or she trains with shoes on.

And etcetera:

Now I DO think that the things that make UFC unrelealistic are the moves that they make illegal such as upkicks, straight kicks to the knees, strikes to the throat, etc. Obviously this is done for the sake of the fighters and the sport.

But I think it's the method of training that above all else determines the ferocity and performance level in a real altercation. Train how you want to fight, or as close to it as possible.

Oh yea....:

And Wing taught taught me to attack the center and "ignore" the extremities. To use the idea of the triangle as a weapon, and keep things simple. Yeaa for wc!

[t_niehoff]

I love it already. Wing Chun has certainly taught me the same things: Win at all cost! The other day I was invited to participate in an MMA program and boy was it boring!!! I stuck around afterward with a friend who was in charge of coordinating the program and showed him the difference between wing chun and mma. The one thing that I made clear was the wing chun is not a game - its not a sport or for entertainment like UFC, etc....no disrespect to those practitioners, but lets face it, the rules of those competitions are what make it entertainment.


This is part of the street-sport or "real fighting" myth -- or more accurately, delusion -- sold by the TMAists out of necessity. It's necessary for them to explain why they can't step in a ring/cage/gym and perform (fight) without looking like the unskilled, out-of-conditioned posers that they are. Their answer: because "real fighing" is anything goes, and that the rules limiting certain foul tactics limit them from using their most deadly stuff, etc. This is the same old nonsense we've been told for years, the same stuff the Gracies tried to put to rest with their "Gracie challenges", the the early vale tudos, NHBs and UFCs. That "rationale" (and I use that word very loosely since it doesn't involve rational reasoning) is based on a number of fundamental mistaken assumuptions about fighting -- which, of course, is not surprising since the people making them have little to no genuine fighting experience (to put that more plainly: they, like this guy, don't know what they are talking about).




Out in the streets, there are no rules, and its not for a title or to move on to the next round, etc....it could be for your life or somebody elses. Gotta do what you have to do and wing chun gives you the tools to do just that.
Moses

Yes, in a "streetfight" or when you are attacked or mugged there are "no rules." So what? Does the fact there are no rules mean that *you* will be able to do anything you want -- that your opponent will just let you poke him in the eye or whatever? Of course not. To do whatever you want against a genuinely resisting aggressor coming at you with 100% intensity takes real SKILL. And if your opponent has higher level attributes or skill or both, it takes a lot of SKILL to beat him. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if YOU can't use them with SKILL. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if you are not conditioned for the fight. WCK doesn't give you SKILL. WCK doesn't give you the conditioning you need for the fight. Fighting SKILL and CONDITIONING comes from FIGHTING, by doing and practicing the very thing(s) you want to do as you want to do them under the same conditions you want to do them.

What nonfighters like this guy fail to realize -- because they never fight -- is what is really involved in fighting. For instance, on the ground, yes, you can bite, fishhook, gouge, etc. You can use all those foul tactics IF YOU HAVE CONTROL OVER YOUR OPPONENT. If you don't, those things will be very, very difficult, if not impossible, to pull off (and, btw, those foul tactics won't "win" the fight) . And this is because controlling your opponent on the ground is the fundamental skill that permits you to strike or submit (incapacitate), to actually "end" the fight. And if you are not controlling him, unless he is a complete scrub, he'll be trying to control you.

Practitioners of judo, sambo, catch, BJJ, etc. (ground fighitng arts/sports) recognize this because they fight on the ground. And their training revolves around controlling you on the ground -- by practicing that in sparring against other really good fighters. When these "sport" guys are attacked or mugged or when they fighting the ring/cage/gym, they are able to do what they train to do: control their opponent on the ground and use that control to then finish the fight. Because they will control you when they hit the ground, they can use fishhooking, gouging, biting, etc. against you (as set ups) and you won't be able to use it against them. It won't matter that it is a "no rules" situation. What matters is that they have the skills to control you and you won't have the skills to control them.

And its the same for free-movement stand-up or on the inside/clinch. For example, in MT "sport" you can't kick to the groin or punch the throat. But MT fighters highly develop their kicking and striking skills. Do you think in a "streetfight" they couldn't kick you in the groin instead of the stomach or leg? Of course they could. Can they practice really kicking their training partners in the groin? Of course not. But they can relatively safely practice in 100% sparring kicking their opponents on "nonfoul" targets and by doing that develop really good kicking skills. When the situation changes, from sport to "street", they will still have those skills, and all they will need to do is alter their tactics (in this case the target). This is why the situation will determine the tactics but the root or fundamental skills you NEED are the same (regardless of the situation). In different fighting situtations (street, sport, gym,etc.) you may need to use different tactics but the fundamental skills you will use in all those situations is constant.

[sanjuro_ronin]

This is part of the street-sport or "real fighting" myth -- or more accurately, delusion -- sold by the TMAists out of necessity. It's necessary for them to explain why they can't step in a ring/cage/gym and perform (fight) without looking like the unskilled, out-of-conditioned posers that they are. Their answer: because "real fighing" is anything goes, and that the rules limiting certain foul tactics limit them from using their most deadly stuff, etc. This is the same old nonsense we've been told for years, the same stuff the Gracies tried to put to rest with their "Gracie challenges", the the early vale tudos, NHBs and UFCs. That "rationale" (and I use that word very loosely since it doesn't involve rational reasoning) is based on a number of fundamental mistaken assumuptions about fighting -- which, of course, is not surprising since the people making them have little to no genuine fighting experience (to put that more plainly: they, like this guy, don't know what they are talking about).




Yes, in a "streetfight" or when you are attacked or mugged there are "no rules." So what? Does the fact there are no rules mean that *you* will be able to do anything you want -- that your opponent will just let you poke him in the eye or whatever? Of course not. To do whatever you want against a genuinely resisting aggressor coming at you with 100% intensity takes real SKILL. And if your opponent has higher level attributes or skill or both, it takes a lot of SKILL to beat him. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if YOU can't use them with SKILL. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if you are not conditioned for the fight. WCK doesn't give you SKILL. WCK doesn't give you the conditioning you need for the fight. Fighting SKILL and CONDITIONING comes from FIGHTING, by doing and practicing the very thing(s) you want to do as you want to do them under the same conditions you want to do them.

What nonfighters like this guy fail to realize -- because they never fight -- is what is really involved in fighting. For instance, on the ground, yes, you can bite, fishhook, gouge, etc. You can use all those foul tactics IF YOU HAVE CONTROL OVER YOUR OPPONENT. If you don't, those things will be very, very difficult, if not impossible, to pull off (and, btw, those foul tactics won't "win" the fight) . And this is because controlling your opponent on the ground is the fundamental skill that permits you to strike or submit (incapacitate), to actually "end" the fight. And if you are not controlling him, unless he is a complete scrub, he'll be trying to control you.

Practitioners of judo, sambo, catch, BJJ, etc. (ground fighitng arts/sports) recognize this because they fight on the ground. And their training revolves around controlling you on the ground -- by practicing that in sparring against other really good fighters. When these "sport" guys are attacked or mugged or when they fighting the ring/cage/gym, they are able to do what they train to do: control their opponent on the ground and use that control to then finish the fight. Because they will control you when they hit the ground, they can use fishhooking, gouging, biting, etc. against you (as set ups) and you won't be able to use it against them. It won't matter that it is a "no rules" situation. What matters is that they have the skills to control you and you won't have the skills to control them.

And its the same for free-movement stand-up or on the inside/clinch. For example, in MT "sport" you can't kick to the groin or punch the throat. But MT fighters highly develop their kicking and striking skills. Do you think in a "streetfight" they couldn't kick you in the groin instead of the stomach or leg? Of course they could. Can they practice really kicking their training partners in the groin? Of course not. But they can relatively safely practice in 100% sparring kicking their opponents on "nonfoul" targets and by doing that develop really good kicking skills. When the situation changes, from sport to "street", they will still have those skills, and all they will need to do is alter their tactics (in this case the target). This is why the situation will determine the tactics but the root or fundamental skills you NEED are the same (regardless of the situation). In different fighting situtations (street, sport, gym,etc.) you may need to use different tactics but the fundamental skills you will use in all those situations is constant.

You know, luckly these people don't get into too many fights, or there would be lots of people running around with hanging eye balls and pummeled groins.

I think you are wasting your "breathe", this myth has been dispelled for some time now and only those that choose to believe it still spew it out.

[HardWork8]

This is part of the street-sport or "real fighting" myth -- or more accurately, delusion -- sold by the TMAists out of necessity. It's necessary for them to explain why they can't step in a ring/cage/gym and perform (fight) without looking like the unskilled, out-of-conditioned posers that they are.

How many real TMA-ists have you beaten recently in bare knuckle fights?


This is the same old nonsense we've been told for years, the same stuff the Gracies tried to put to rest with their "Gracie challenges",

Yet it is interesting that Carlson Gracie that viewed Wing Chun's effectiveness with great respect and teamed up with Master Samuel Kwok for joint seminars.

Here, enlighten yourself:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3jJ-lb7N8A


the the early vale tudos, NHBs and UFCs. That "rationale" (and I use that word very loosely since it doesn't involve rational reasoning) is based on a number of fundamental mistaken assumuptions about fighting -- which, of course, is not surprising since the people making them have little to no genuine fighting experience (to put that more plainly: they, like this guy, don't know what they are talking about).

If by "this guy", you mean RGV Wing Chun, then I have pleasure informing you that he is a Wing Chun sifu (unlike you) and he is certified under MASTER SAMUEL KWOK. :D


Yes, in a "streetfight" or when you are attacked or mugged there are "no rules." So what? Does the fact there are no rules mean that *you* will be able to do anything you want -- that your opponent will just let you poke him in the eye or whatever? Of course not. To do whatever you want against a genuinely resisting aggressor coming at you with 100% intensity takes real SKILL. And if your opponent has higher level attributes or skill or both, it takes a lot of SKILL to beat him. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if YOU can't use them with SKILL. It doesn't matter if BJJ or MT or WCK "has the tools" if you are not conditioned for the fight. WCK doesn't give you SKILL. WCK doesn't give you the conditioning you need for the fight. Fighting SKILL and CONDITIONING comes from FIGHTING, by doing and practicing the very thing(s) you want to do as you want to do them under the same conditions you want to do them.

Since you have never been exposed to genuine TCMA practice, then you are making the incorrect assumption, yet again, I might add, that there is no fighting training in Wing Chun.

So I will repeat it to you AGAIN: THERE IS FIGHTING TRAINING/SPARRING IN TRADITIONAL KUNG FU AND THERE IS ALSO CONDITIONING TRAINING.

You wouldn't have known that because you have never trained in an authentic kung fu school, but you should have grasped that fact by now because you have been informed of that fact, god knows how many times.


What nonfighters like this guy fail to realize -- because they never fight -- is what is really involved in fighting.

This "guy" is a "nonfighter"? How do you know? Or do you mean a non-professional fighter?



For instance, on the ground, yes, you can bite, fishhook, gouge, etc. You can use all those foul tactics IF YOU HAVE CONTROL OVER YOUR OPPONENT. If you don't, those things will be very, very difficult, if not impossible, to pull off (and, btw, those foul tactics won't "win" the fight) . And this is because controlling your opponent on the ground is the fundamental skill that permits you to strike or submit (incapacitate), to actually "end" the fight. And if you are not controlling him, unless he is a complete scrub, he'll be trying to control you.

Practitioners of judo, sambo, catch, BJJ, etc. (ground fighitng arts/sports) recognize this because they fight on the ground. And their training revolves around controlling you on the ground -- by practicing that in sparring against other really good fighters. When these "sport" guys are attacked or mugged or when they fighting the ring/cage/gym, they are able to do what they train to do: control their opponent on the ground and use that control to then finish the fight. Because they will control you when they hit the ground, they can use fishhooking, gouging, biting, etc. against you (as set ups) and you won't be able to use it against them. It won't matter that it is a "no rules" situation. What matters is that they have the skills to control you and you won't have the skills to control them.

And its the same for free-movement stand-up or on the inside/clinch. For example, in MT "sport" you can't kick to the groin or punch the throat. But MT fighters highly develop their kicking and striking skills. Do you think in a "streetfight" they couldn't kick you in the groin instead of the stomach or leg? Of course they could. Can they practice really kicking their training partners in the groin? Of course not. But they can relatively safely practice in 100% sparring kicking their opponents on "nonfoul" targets and by doing that develop really good kicking skills. When the situation changes, from sport to "street", they will still have those skills, and all they will need to do is alter their tactics (in this case the target). This is why the situation will determine the tactics but the root or fundamental skills you NEED are the same (regardless of the situation). In different fighting situtations (street, sport, gym,etc.) you may need to use different tactics but the fundamental skills you will use in all those situations is constant.

Some obvious, if irrelevant points. Yes thank you, no one here knows that you can adapt sparring/fighting training to real life encounters.

You know Terence old boy, I still don't know what you are doing posting in a Wing Chun thread. You obviously don't have any understanding of authentic Wing Chun, because the little training that you have had has been in a McKwoon.

Yet you keep entering TCMA threads making deregatory and sweeping statements about people you don't know and arts that you have absolutely no understanding of, and without a credible platform based on TCMA knowledge.

[Mr Punch]

Good posts T and Van.

To the OP, can I just ask you to compare the following lists:

1) You are trying to knock someone out or break something off someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to knock someone out, break something off someone or maim or kill someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to hit someone (who is sometimes trying to do the same to you) at a polite level of strength.
2) You are pulling punches and kicks against someone who is doing the same to you (sometimes) and work takedowns against someone who lets you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is sometimes trying to do the same to you.

OK, so now put a title to these lists out of:

A Typical Wing Chun Practice Session
A UFC Fight
A Streetfight

and then, to finish the exercise, tell me which one is the odd one out.

If you feel your school is not in the 'Typical' bracket please feel free to break down your training in a similar manner to show how similar it is to the others mentioned above.

Thanks! :)


Yet it is interesting that Carlson Gracie that viewed Wing Chun's effectiveness with great respect and teamed up with Master Samuel Kwok for joint seminars.Viewed is the right word. You may notice that none of the BJJ types are actually joining in with Mr Kwok's part of the seminar.


You obviously don't have any understanding of authentic Wing Chun, because the little training that you have had has been in a McKwoon.Considering the number of times you have inferred that people have been saying they're hard enough to have a crack at others' sifus and the number of times you've chided people for having no respect for 'masters' and 'grandmasters' perhaps you'd like to shut up or go and challenge Robert Chu, who you think you can obviously beat? Just wondering...

[sihing]

Good posts T and Van.

To the OP, can I just ask you to compare the following lists:

1) You are trying to knock someone out or break something off someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to knock someone out, break something off someone or maim or kill someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to hit someone (who is sometimes trying to do the same to you) at a polite level of strength.
2) You are pulling punches and kicks against someone who is doing the same to you (sometimes) and work takedowns against someone who lets you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is sometimes trying to do the same to you.

OK, so now put a title to these lists out of:

A Typical Wing Chun Practice Session
A UFC Fight
A Streetfight

and then, to finish the exercise, tell me which one is the odd one out.

If you feel your school is not in the 'Typical' bracket please feel free to break down your training in a similar manner to show how similar it is to the others mentioned above.

Thanks! :)

Viewed is the right word. You may notice that none of the BJJ types are actually joining in with Mr Kwok's part of the seminar.

Considering the number of times you have inferred that people have been saying they're hard enough to have a crack at others' sifus and the number of times you've chided people for having no respect for 'masters' and 'grandmasters' perhaps you'd like to shut up or go and challenge Robert Chu, who you think you can obviously beat? Just wondering...

Good questions, but why would you compare a "Typical Wing Chun Practice Session", with the key word here being "Practice", with a UFC/Street Fight, with the key word here being "Fight", the two to me mean different things, therefore implying different intentions in what one is doing during each activity. If you replaced the word practice in the WC part, to Fight, then it would be a more fair comparison.

If all of them contained the word Fight, then I still see difference, because the UFC part is a sport with rules and regulations and refs/doctors. The fighters here know before hand who they are fighting (for the most part), and modify their training to that specific opponent, while still utilizing their own individual strengths, against the other guys weakness, as well as knowing they won't be seriously hurt (this is in no way is meant to take away the guts it requires to get into this sort of fighting competition, it takes tremendous guts to do what these guys do, I salute them for that and how hard they train). This doesn't mean to say that these guys can't fight on the street as well, but when you start this game of comparison, you have to have to equal people of similar skills, not a pro vs a scrub, as the pro will win for the most part all of the time, no matter where the fight takes place.

In all essence, I think the main thing we are talking about here is how people train, not specifically about the style or system they are practicing in. Wing Chun is a very specific training method to teach us specific things, but there is no reason in hell why I can't incorporate more modern training methods, like bag work, sparring sessions, specified conditioning regemends, etc.. to the the present system of forms, chi/laap sau, mok jong, weapons and so forth. For me I am already doing this, not just to improve my WC or fighting ability but because it is just good for me to train in these things. I figure if I am going to start working cardio, I might as do so using my fighting skills incorporated into it, rather than just running or biking to get fit. But that's just me:)
James

[CFT]

Good questions, but why would you compare a "Typical Wing Chun Practice Session", with the key word here being "Practice", with a UFC/Street Fight, with the key word here being "Fight", the two to me mean different things, therefore implying different intentions in what one is doing during each activity. If you replaced the word practice in the WC part, to Fight, then it would be a more fair comparison.

JamesI suppose Mr. P is implying that some (or maybe many) Wing Chun practitioners never move beyond the practice session, and maybe more pertinently not beyond their WCK training circle.

[sihing]

I suppose Mr. P is implying that some (or maybe many) Wing Chun practitioners never move beyond the practice session, and maybe more pertinently not beyond their WCK training circle.

Most don't, but that it the individuals/Sifu's/Instructors fault, not that of the art or training method. So when you say things like that you have to replace the word "Wing Chun", with whomever's name that is doing this. People get stuck all the time in the progression of the training system, I've seen this tons over the last 20yrs. That's okay, as long as you realize what you are doing and getting out of it. I personally love the training it is fun and I get alot of joy out of it, and I believe I realize that there is a difference btwn training something specific and full out fighting.

JR

[Mr Punch]

Thanks for the subtitles! :D

I wasn't aware I was even implying it... I thought it was blatantly obvious!

[t_niehoff]

Thanks, Mr. Punch.

I offer my views for consideration by those with that share my objective (developing real, usable fighting skill with WCK) and perspective (one based on reality, and founded on evidence and reason). And I listen to the views of those that share these values even if we disagree.

However, I've come to the conclusion that there is no point in trying to have rational (based on evidence and reason) discussions with people like Hardwork8 who have irrational beliefs, have no significant experience with WCK (fighting), have no significant experience training with good fighters, etc. They signal their irrational perspective and ignorance by the terms and phrases they use, and by the things they say. I'm not saying these people are idiots or stupid; some of them are quite bright. But they are lost. They are fantasy-based martial artists, theoretical nonfighters, and will continue to believe the world is flat no matter what.

As I'm not interested in fantasy, they can offer me nothing useful toward my objective (developing real and better fighting skill with WCK), there is no point in having any discussion with them.

[Mr Punch]

Most don't, but that it the individuals/Sifu's/Instructors fault, not that of the art or training method. So when you say things like that you have to replace the word "Wing Chun", with whomever's name that is doing this. People get stuck all the time in the progression of the training system, I've seen this tons over the last 20yrs. That's okay, as long as you realize what you are doing and getting out of it. I personally love the training it is fun and I get alot of joy out of it, and I believe I realize that there is a difference btwn training something specific and full out fighting.



If you feel your school is not in the 'Typical' bracket please feel free to break down your training in a similar manner to show how similar it is to the others mentioned above.So James, just for ****s and giggles, would you like to tell us how close your training gets to my assessment of what a streetfight entails? Does it come closer than a UFC fight... or to be more 'sporting' ( :D ) does it come closer than MMA training for competition?

[t_niehoff]

I realize that there is a difference btwn training something specific and full out fighting.


James, of course there is a difference.

Let's look at it this way. What are we trying to do with our training (that "something specific" you mention)? We are trying to develop the ability to fight 'full out' successfully using our WCK method and skills. What are boxers, MT fighters, BJJ fighters, sambo fighters, etc. trying to do? Develop the ability to fight "full out" using their respective method and skills. What have they -- the functional martial arts -- taught us? That the only way to develop that ability beyond a low level is by and with training geared toward "full out fighting." That means, learning things as you will really need to do them in fighting (which can only be determined by fighting, as otherwise it is just a theory)and practicing those things as you really intend to do them under the same conditions you intend to do them (the specificity principle of motor skill development). Only in that way will you be able to perform well -- develop fighting skill. To "practice" is to do.

Skill at doing something comes from doing the very thing you are trying to develop (repetition). Fighting skill, which is the ability to perform in fighting (your method and skills), comes from fighting.

There are, of course, different fighting situtations. Street, ring, cage, gym, tournament, etc., and including our opponent. The FUNDAMENTAL skills you need for all those situations is the same. They will work equally well in any of these siuations. Those skills are developed by and through fighitng. The tactics (our choice of how to use those skills) will vary and depend on the fighting situation.

[HardWork8]

Good posts T and Van.

To the OP, can I just ask you to compare the following lists:

1) You are trying to knock someone out or break something off someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to knock someone out, break something off someone or maim or kill someone who is trying to do the same to you.
2) You punch and kick and try to takedown full strength and speed someone who is doing the same to you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is trying to do the same to you.

1) You are trying to hit someone (who is sometimes trying to do the same to you) at a polite level of strength.
2) You are pulling punches and kicks against someone who is doing the same to you (sometimes) and work takedowns against someone who lets you.
3) You work hard to get superior positions to be able to achieve (1) on someone who is sometimes trying to do the same to you.

OK, so now put a title to these lists out of:

A Typical Wing Chun Practice Session
A UFC Fight
A Streetfight

and then, to finish the exercise, tell me which one is the odd one out.

If you feel your school is not in the 'Typical' bracket please feel free to break down your training in a similar manner to show how similar it is to the others mentioned above.

Thanks! :)

The street fight of course is the odd one out, because it can hit you out of the blue; you have no idea who you are facing;How many there are;if they are armed or if they are going to sucker punch you before you even know that you are in a street fight.

Well, now that we got that straight, lets then go to the "typical Wing Chun Practice Session". Now if you compare a "typical" any TMA session to the UFC and street fighting then you are making an unfair comparison. Because:

1. A typical TMA class is more likely than not a "Mcdojo/Kwoon".

2. UFCs are events for professional athletes who train very hard to participate in such sport's events

3. Streets fights as we have established, are separate animals from the the first 2.

There are Wing Chun schools that practice contact sparring and in the case of the Mainland Chinese lineage that I pracitice, groundfighting as well(I have not reached this level yet).

What you don't see when you observe WC sparring in this lineage are people "bouncing" around as in sport TKD or boxing/kickboxing. They will be using WC stances/rooting and techniques.



Viewed is the right word. You may notice that none of the BJJ types are actually joining in with Mr Kwok's part of the seminar.

I wouldn't know, because I was not there. The point (that you obviously missed) here is and always was, how Carlson Gracie sees Wing Chun's EFFECTIVENESS and his RESPECT for Master Samuel Kwok.


Considering the number of times you have inferred that people have been saying they're hard enough to have a crack at others' sifus and the number of times you've chided people for having no respect for 'masters' and 'grandmasters' perhaps you'd like to shut up or go and challenge Robert Chu, who you think you can obviously beat? Just wondering...

You have missed the point, yet again. Can you please show me where I have boasted that I could beat Robert Chu or anyone for that matter?
And why bring him into the discussion?:confused:

[sihing]

So James, just for ****s and giggles, would you like to tell us how close your training gets to my assessment of what a streetfight entails? Does it come closer than a UFC fight... or to be more 'sporting' ( :D ) does it come closer than MMA training for competition?

Neither, I'm still learning the system and absorbing what it has to teach me. I have learned drills that I am now incorporating into the class that resemble more realistic situations, but this all falls under the relem of "Training". WC for me is very specific training, there's all kinds of stuff that I still have to learn from the training, also things that I already know that have to improve. The application side of it is all up to the individual. The way I am thinking about WC now, and the way I teach it, is very strict like. The reason for this is because I want to absorb what the training system is teaching me, and possess the skill sets to a high level. I also try to do the same with the people that I am teaching it too. Before when I was training TWC, we did allot of application stuff, everything from standard self defence techniques vs. grabs, chokes, club/knife defences, to punching/kicking defences, up to what my Instructor at that time called Anti Grappling stuff as well. Looking back on this I find that the students had knowledge of how to defend themselves, but did not have the attributes or body mechanics within their bodies to pull any of it off. So for now, my main concern is picking up on the body structure and mechanics that WSL VT teaches. Slowly, more realistic application stuff will be presented and worked on. No use doing this stuff to early, when the body can't use what you are training in, IMO.

Honestly, I really don't think about getting attacked or worry about situations like that. The way I understand the way of things, if you are looking for a fight, you will find one, if your not you won't. I worked security for years in all kinds of public places, dealt with drunks and people on drugs, only a few times was any type of physicality needed to deal with things. I will say, if I lived in a place where the chances of physical violence was more prevelant, then yes I probably would add more realistic "what if" scenerios to our training. Here were I live, knife attacks are becoming more common place. How do you deal with someone with a knife? You run first, if not gain some sort of equalizer, but trying to teach people technique to defeat someone with a knife is silly and will just engrain a false sense of confidence in that situation.

James

[HardWork8]

However, I've come to the conclusion that there is no point in trying to have rational (based on evidence and reason) discussions with people like Hardwork8 who have irrational beliefs,

You mean, "irrational beliefs" such as Wing Chun can actually be used for fighting?

These beliefs are based on my own experience of training Traditional Wing Chun, which is an art that you yourself have never trained authentically and are not likely to train, not with your attitude anyway.



have no significant experience with WCK (fighting), have no significant experience training with good fighters, etc.

What part of "there is contact fighting training in my Wing Chun school as well as many other authentic Wing Chun and TMA schools" don't you understand?


I'm not saying these people are idiots or stupid;

Well, thank god for that!:)


some of them are quite bright.

Well thank you Terence,old boy.:)


But they are lost.

Ouch!:eek:


They are fantasy-based martial artists, theoretical nonfighters, and will continue to believe the world is flat no matter what.

AGAIN! What part of "There is contact fighting training in my Wing Chun School as well as in other authentic Wing Chun and TMA schools", don't you understand???


As I'm not interested in fantasy, they can offer me nothing useful toward my objective (developing real and better fighting skill with WCK), there is no point in having any discussion with them.

Except that you are not really practicing Wing Chun, it is, and on the plus side might I add, a MMA that works for you, but it is an error to call this Wing Chun.

[unkokusai]

Classic stuff:


1) There is 'fighting' that no one has ever seen, be it 'contact' in the kwoon (which can mean a lot of things) to 'challenges' that are always and forever (and quite deliberately) cloaked in mystery.

2) There are 'masters' who could destroy everyone and anyone but somehow never so much as get into an argument about returning soup at a restaurant.

3) There are techniques and approaches that only the claimant (and always-absent 'brothers' in training) seems to know about.

4) Anyone who disagrees with anything said by these keepers of the vague is necessarily 'inauthentic.'

5) Training or competition that is regularly tested and easily verified is seen as a threat and must be disregarded or denounced in some manner.

[SAAMAG]

It's just one of those things man.

You always know when martial artists really fight, because their fighting will conform to the task at hand instead of to a single doctrine. They realize what works and what doesn't, and they yearn to learn more about this so-called "fighting"...so from that point on the martial artist no longer conforms to styles, but rather absorbs tools that make them better in fighting, regardless of the source. It's not MMA, it's just martial arts.

The ephiphany that develops from fighting (to me) is that no style, or master, or person is the end-all. These elements are rather guides to get you started, but the completion of one's journey is up to the individual. One learns to trust not in stories of old, but of experiences of present day...and the performance will be the result of only the individual.

[anerlich]

If that means I bite you, gouge your eyes out, kick your spine... whatever I have to do. That is obviously not legal in UFC.

I haven't seen many WC teachers that teach biting or eye gouging. I doubt many have researched how to do it effectively.

Maybe french kissing is chi sao for the bite? (No I won't try it with you).

Kicking the spine? YMMV, but a IMO well-placed blow to the jaw or head is usually the fastest way to stop an attacker.

Bite someone, claw an eye out or turn someone into a paraplegic and you'll probably go to jail. Even if he started it, and certainly if it was over a barstool, a girl, or a parking space.

MAs are great stuff, interesting, fulfilling, lots of fun. But martial skill is one of the least important to master to improve your odds of survivng violent crime.

Another RBSD vs MMA thread ... looks like we can never have enough of those. **yawn**

[Mr Punch]

Great answer HW8! :)

Despite you (probably deliberately!) missing the point of which one I am pointing to as the odd one out, I agree with a lot of what you said.

The problem is, of course, that it doesn't relate back to the OP's claim that WC training provides more of a 'reality' focus than UFC-style training.

Of course, I've done 'Animal Day' style training, which could in some way prepare you for the kind of explosive, immediate, surprising violence you might encounter... but then unfortunately I've been in enough altercations to know that it's always a surprise, and that while some training can help, only street smarts itself will help to prepare you for the awareness part, and that no amount of training is going to change my make-up fom basically a peaceful person (and I don't want to! - I have lived too long in areas where constantly being on edge is the only way to prevent getting caught out - it was a truly **** experience)

So, that brings us back to the physical training aspect. Through geographical necessity I've trained in and visited many wing chun schools and in the usual mode of practice there is little to convince me that WC training is more realistic than MMA training (which I have also trained in - incidentally I might add, initially with the aim of sharpening up and testing out my chun skills). In fact, usually the opposite.

Also incidentally (as I don't recognise your post as directly addressing the OP's point), there are only two points I disagree with, but I'm afraid these are points you brought up because of a particular lack of knowledge about MMA training.

One is your implication that only pro-fighters go through a realistic, thorough training regime (which still doesn't really sit with the OP's assertion that UFC fighters are not as well equipped to deal with reality as chunners, but anyway...). This is not true. We did semi-full-contact training at my wing chun school, and sometimes padded-up full contact (although my sifu was basically against it), but nothing in my then 7-8 years of training wing chun was anywhere near the intensity of the MMA school I went to. And I didn't go to any stand-around and talk chun sessions either - we were always hands-on... The MMA gave me a lot more experience in a very very short time of being punched and kicked full-power and what the hell I needed to do to avoid this (whether a supposedly unique chun strategy like moving straight in and keeping the pressure up, or boxing-style ducking and weaving, or how to use the evasions and footwork in biu jee for avoidance and setting up... The point is: I was tested a lot more and a lot more realistically than at any chun school)!

The second one is about chunners bouncing around, which is irrelevant to the topic at hand, apart from being probably quite inaccurate.

Also irrelevant so I'm going to make this my last word on this...
The point (that you obviously missed) here is and always was, how Carlson Gracie sees Wing Chun's EFFECTIVENESS and his RESPECT for Master Samuel Kwok.I'll venture that Mr Gracie saw good business. I can't speak for either of them, but while I’ve no reason to doubt that Mr Gracie may have felt respect for Sam as a friend, I also have little reason to believe that he thought of the martial partnership as anything other than business.


You have missed the point, yet again. Can you please show me where I have boasted that I could beat Robert Chu or anyone for that matter?
And why bring him into the discussion?:confused:Again, beside the point, but it’s based on when you have accused others with differing opinions of saying that they could take on Grandmaster XYZ of old.

Anyway, was going to congratulate everyone on keeping this thread civil… but that’s when I started writing this post this morning before work and the obligatory obnoxious posts reared up! :eek:

[Mr Punch]

James, in summary (and no offence here), you have no experience of living in violent situations or of violent encounters and little to no experience of MMA or full contact... am I right? Well, I know this is a discussion board and I've no right or reason to want to chase you off it, but how exactly are you able to qualify an opinion on the subject of this thread?!

And HW8, I'd be interested (honestly not trying to call you on this) to hear more detail about the way you practice: the full-contact training that equips you for the mean streets...

Anerlich, obviously not enough, cos I've still never worked out wtf RBSD stands for!

EDIT! Aaaaahhhh, satori! Reality Based Self Defence, right?

[Mr Punch]

Kicking the spine?Yeah, kick the spine, you end up in the nick getting called Nancy.

[anerlich]

RBSD - Reality Based Self Defence.

Of course, "Reality" is as much a matter of perception as ... reality.

[anerlich]

I'll venture that Mr Gracie saw good business. I can't speak for either of them, but while I’ve no reason to doubt that Mr Gracie may have felt respect for Sam as a friend, I also have little reason to believe that he thought of the martial partnership as anything other than business.


Yeah, most of us have seen that clip. I think both saw a business opportunity and hopefully respected each other (an example for us all to ponder). I didn't see Carlson doing any chi sao or Sam drilling sweeps in a gi.

[sihing]

James, in summary (and no offence here), you have no experience of living in violent situations or of violent encounters and little to no experience of MMA or full contact... am I right? Well, I know this is a discussion board and I've no right or reason to want to chase you off it, but how exactly are you able to qualify an opinion on the subject of this thread?!

And HW8, I'd be interested (honestly not trying to call you on this) to hear more detail about the way you practice: the full-contact training that equips you for the mean streets...

Anerlich, obviously not enough, cos I've still never worked out wtf RBSD stands for!

EDIT! Aaaaahhhh, satori! Reality Based Self Defence, right?

I'm more lover than fighter for sure bro:) I avoid violent situations whenever I can, but like everyone else sometimes it comes our way. For me I've been lucky to not have many situations where it has gotten too out of hand. I have experience in full contact, I used to spar alot in the old days, but for now the emphasises is on proper mechanics and building the right structure from the training (we do have WC specific sparring platforms, where we can go pretty hard with some control, this stuff I am training more and more). Never trained UFC stuff.

Regarding your comment about me and whether or not I'm qualified to raise an opinion on this thread, well the topic is "What WC has taught me", all that practice the art can comment on that. I replied to your post because your comparison was wrong IMO, "Typical Wing Chun Practice session" vs. Street/UFC fight. Both are two different things IMO. WC and the application of it are two different things as well, one is a training method, the other is me fighting or defending myself. I don't really care if you think I don't have the qualifications or not to make a comment, it's a free forum, anyone can say anything, and all we can talk about here is what we "Think" about things, as there is usually no personal contact between people. How does one talk about fighting, when all we have here is keyboards and experiences. Your experience is just that yours, not mine, so therefore it's all theory to me. If you want to talk about fighting, then face to face is the only way to discuss things of that nature.

James

[t_niehoff]

WC and the application of it are two different things as well, one is a training method, the other is me fighting or defending myself.


This is the sort of thinking that goes to the heart of the problem with TMAs and why they don't have functional training methods.

You learn and train to ride a bike by riding the bike. You learn and train to swim by getting in the water and swimming. You learn and train to surf by getting on the board, going out into the ocean, and surfing. You learn and develop a skill by performing that skill. The real training for any skill is performing the target skill itself. You can't learn and train WCK apart from fighting, as WCK is fighting.

[sihing]

This is the sort of thinking that goes to the heart of the problem with TMAs and why they don't have functional training methods.

You learn and train to ride a bike by riding the bike. You learn and train to swim by getting in the water and swimming. You learn and train to surf by getting on the board, going out into the ocean, and surfing. You learn and develop a skill by performing that skill. The real training for any skill is performing the target skill itself. You can't learn and train WCK apart from fighting, as WCK is fighting.

This is where you and I disagree, which is okay. I look at Wing Chun as a training method only, not an application system. Like people that want to become a doctor, they don't just go and set up a practice and begin to take on patients, they go to school for years and years, to learn about medicine and how to diagnose disease and proper treatments, biology, physiology, etc..., then after that they practice Medicine by becoming doctors. WC is no different, it is teaching me specific things, things I don't already possess physically and intellectually, but the method cannot fight without a person to use what it teaches, and since none of us look at things exactly the same, nor do any of us have the same physical abilities/attributes, none of us will use it the same way. You can gain the tools that WC teaches easily by practicing the forms, chi sau/laap sau and all the other things involved with the training system, but to actually be able to use it against somone else (application of the tools), especially those with skills, you have to go out and spar/fight in a natural way, using your new skills the way you, and only you, would use them, just like no two doctors do things exactly the same way, they interpret their training/knowledge and use it they way the feel is the most efficient and natural for them. Your examples, surfing, swimming, riding a bike, throwing a baseball, shooting hoops, playing tennis are simple actions, requiring only you controling you, and nothing else. The first time you go on a surf board you fall, and continue to fall until you get used to it, as the surf is relatively the same, everywhere you go, depending on the intensity of it. If you fall in love with surfing you will become more skilled at staying on top of your board, eventually being able to surf the wave for as long as it lasts. This is very different from preventing someone from hurting you in fight while attacking them as well, you should know this...

You keeping on saying that the TMA's lack any functionality, the only way to prove that would be for you to fight each and every TMA fighter too find out yourself, your statements are way to broad to be taken seriously. Every MA/Fighting system, has good and bad practitioners, with people that can fight great and those that can't fight their way out of a paper bag, that is the way of things as it is always up to the individual and what their goals are thru Martial Arts training. I've never said anything on this forum that guarantee's success in fighting, as no one can guarantee you anything regarding how effective you will be as a fighter (not even your buddy Matt Thornton), all we can do is increase our chances by training in something, and doing so in a intense, consistent manner.

James

[sanjuro_ronin]

Your examples, surfing, swimming, riding a bike, throwing a baseball, shooting hoops, playing tennis are simple actions, requiring only you controling you, and nothing else. The first time you go on a surf board you fall, and continue to fall until you get used to it, as the surf is relatively the same, everywhere you go, depending on the intensity of it. If you fall in love with surfing you will become more skilled at staying on top of your board, eventually being able to surf the wave for as long as it lasts. This is very different from preventing someone from hurting you in fight while attacking them as well, you should know this...

Physical skills are just that, physical skills.
While I understand your comparison to being a doctor and med school, being a doctor is NOT a physical skill per say, though a surgeon would argue with that :)

As for your above example in regards to control, while the control issue is an issue, I think T point was well made, wanna use/train WC to be effective in a fight it may be counter-productive to view WC training as different than what is need to be effective in a fight.

[t_niehoff]

This is where you and I disagree, which is okay. I look at Wing Chun as a training method only, not an application system. Like people that want to become a doctor, they don't just go and set up a practice and begin to take on patients, they go to school for years and years, to learn about medicine and how to diagnose disease and proper treatments, biology, physiology, etc..., then after that they practice Medicine by becoming doctors. WC is no different,


Yes, I know we disagree. Whether that is OK or not depends on if you care about developing functional skills. We both can't be right.

WCK is not like training to be a physician. That analogy is fundamentally flawed. WCK is a physical skill. You don't learn and develop boxing or wrestling or WCK by training like a physican does, but by training like an athlete does. In other words, you develop the target skill by doing the target skill. You can't develop fighting skill by not fighting but only by fighting.



You keeping on saying that the TMA's lack any functionality, the only way to prove that would be for you to fight each and every TMA fighter too find out yourself, your statements are way to broad to be taken seriously.

That's not true either. We can know if a general approach (like the TMA approach)to training works well or not by looking at evidence of results across populations (where are all the high level fighters TMA training produces?), and by looking to the skill-building process that we know from sport and scientific research is required to develop higher level skills and comparing that to the TMA approach.



Every MA/Fighting system, has good and bad practitioners, with people that can fight great and those that can't fight their way out of a paper bag, that is the way of things as it is always up to the individual and what their goals are thru Martial Arts training.


More poor reasoning. If you look at the functional martial arts (boxing, wrestling, MMA, sambo, judo, BJJ, etc.) you will see that individuals that do the training get functional results (are able to do what they train to do, i.e., fight with their method). How well they can do that depends, just like it does with any sport or athletic activity, by the quality and quantity of their training/practice (doing the skill itself). Contrast that to TMAs and you see the same level of results just aren't there. And this is true across populations. The TMA approach to training is simply a really poor way to develop skill.

It is abundantly clear from the evidence that fighting skill is directly related to the amount of quality fighting (sparring) you do. And this only makes sense as you develop skill by practicing the skill, not by not practicing the skill.



I've never said anything on this forum that guarantee's success in fighting, as no one can guarantee you anything regarding how effective you will be as a fighter (not even your buddy Matt Thornton), all we can do is increase our chances by training in something, and doing so in a intense, consistent manner.


Nothing guarantees success, but certainly having better fighting skill increases our chances -- significantly. And training poorly won't give you better skill. You won't get better skill by not practicing the skill.

[sanjuro_ronin]

It is abundantly clear from the evidence that fighting skill is directly related to the amount of quality fighting (sparring) you do. And this only makes sense as you develop skill by practicing the skill, not by not practicing the skill.

Just to be controversial:

Why does sparring work to make you a better fighter?
Aren't drills enough?

Not as easy a question as you may think for it raises as much questions as you try to answer it.

In short, you become a better fighter because you are fighting.
But we know that is not the truth because the skills we develop are only specific to the TYPE of sparring we do, ie:
WC people sparring other WC people get very good at sparring other WC people.
One then can argue that, sparring MMA is the key, BUT we also know that sparring in a MMA environment makes you skilled at, sparring in a MMA environment:
Mats, training clothes, protective gear, ring, etc.

Of course there is transference, there is always some transference, but allow me to continue:

Sparring is also size and weight dependant, and as such the skills you develop are based on WHO you spar against:
The timing you develop is based on how you are attacked, ex:
The timing needed to counter a MT round kick is different than a TKD round kick.
The skill needed to counter a boxing combo is different than a WC combo and vice-versa.

Sparring develops a highly specialized skill set.

Skilled MMA fighters don't do will outside their chosen skill set ( unless they come from a core system and are returning to it, and even then, there is a "loss").
Same goes for boxers, judoka, sumai and turkish oil wrestlers.

So, I put this forth to you, my fellow jedi's and Padawan's ( yes I am a geek, but a geek that can kick your ass):
Perhaps its not the sparring, but all the drilling, that makes one an effective fighter.
We certainly drill more than we spar.
Perhaps if we drill in a way that makes the "skills" obtained in sparring, obtaniable in drilling, sparring, while never being redunant, will be put in its proper "perspective, as a tool to develop certain skills, but not the end of all skills.

Perhaps...

[AndrewS]

Terence writes in response to James:


WCK is not like training to be a physician. That analogy is fundamentally flawed. WCK is a physical skill. You don't learn and develop boxing or wrestling or WCK by training like a physican does, but by training like an athlete does. In other words, you develop the target skill by doing the target skill. You can't develop fighting skill by not fighting but only by fighting

You're arguing over analogies. There's more commonality than difference between the two disciplines in my experience.

Learn a set of tools

Apply a set of tools

Learn from applying your set of tools

Apply a set of tools

repeat.

One learns medicine through its practice.

SJR writes:


Perhaps its not the sparring, but all the drilling, that makes one an effective fighter.
We certainly drill more than we spar.
Perhaps if we drill in a way that makes the "skills" obtained in sparring, obtaniable in drilling, sparring, while never being redunant, will be put in its proper "perspective, as a tool to develop certain skills, but not the end of all skills.

I think you are on to something there. At the end of the day, there is no absolute measure of fighting ability past your ability to fight a specific person at a specific time. Coordination, agililty, power, strength, speed, balance, endurance- these are more definable. Grow them and your likelihood of prevailing on any specific day iagainst any person increases. Drills should develop these qualities; sparring, in a sense, a drill to integrate them.

Andrew

[sanjuro_ronin]

Drills should develop these qualities; sparring, in a sense, a drill to integrate them.

Taking my "devils advocate" position even further, integrate them in a specific context.
But what happens outside that context?
A boxer has awesome skill in a boxing match from integrating his boxing skills in sparring, but how well will they serve him in a wrestling match?
IF he wins that match (KO), it will be from skills honed in drilling, not sparring.
Drilling = developement of power and speed
Sparring= cardio and timing in a activity specfic event

[AndrewS]

SJR writes:

Taking my "devils advocate" position even further, integrate them in a specific context.
But what happens outside that context?
A boxer has awesome skill in a boxing match from integrating his boxing skills in sparring, but how well will they serve him in a wrestling match?
IF he wins that match (KO), it will be from skills honed in drilling, not sparring.
Drilling = developement of power and speed
Sparring= cardio and timing in a activity specfic event

So the boxer doesn't know how to wrestle and wins on strength, power, and wind, things developed in drilling. I'll buy that, though it would require a gross mismatch of attributes between boxer and wrestler.

Andrew

[couch]

So, I put this forth to you, my fellow jedi's and Padawan's ( yes I am a geek, but a geek that can kick your ass):
Perhaps its not the sparring, but all the drilling, that makes one an effective fighter.
We certainly drill more than we spar.
Perhaps if we drill in a way that makes the "skills" obtained in sparring, obtaniable in drilling, sparring, while never being redunant, will be put in its proper "perspective, as a tool to develop certain skills, but not the end of all skills.

Perhaps...

Why not have your cake and eat it too?

I think the drills come before the sparring. Then you have both in the mix. First you 'drill' something (like a jab-cross combo) on the bag, then you take it to a partner to help move with it and have another body in front of you, then you spar with it. It may be true that many people stop at the drilling part (or read: one/two-step sparring).

[sanjuro_ronin]

SJR writes:


So the boxer doesn't know how to wrestle and wins on strength, power, and wind, things developed in drilling. I'll buy that, though it would require a gross mismatch of attributes between boxer and wrestler.

Andrew

What I meant was, if the boxer wins, obviously with strikes, it will be base don attributes developed via drills, not sparring.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Why not have your cake and eat it too?

I think the drills come before the sparring. Then you have both in the mix. First you 'drill' something (like a jab-cross combo) on the bag, then you take it to a partner to help move with it and have another body in front of you, then you spar with it. It may be true that many people stop at the drilling part (or read: one/two-step sparring).

I like pie better than cake, MUFFin pie :D

[t_niehoff]

Why not have your cake and eat it too?

I think the drills come before the sparring. Then you have both in the mix. First you 'drill' something (like a jab-cross combo) on the bag, then you take it to a partner to help move with it and have another body in front of you, then you spar with it. It may be true that many people stop at the drilling part (or read: one/two-step sparring).

As I see it, functional drills (drills that build functional skills) are "snippets" of fighting -- where you take a limited, fighting situation show the trainee what to do, and then let them practice doing it. To me this is what it means to drill: to do repeatedly practice doing what you are going to do as you are going to do it against a genuinely resisting opponent. Drills are useful but need to be integrated into your game, and you can't do that without playing the game.

[couch]

As I see it, functional drills (drills that build functional skills) are "snippets" of fighting -- where you take a limited, fighting situation show the trainee what to do, and then let them practice doing it. To me this is what it means to drill: to do repeatedly practice doing what you are going to do as you are going to do it against a genuinely resisting opponent. Drills are useful but need to be integrated into your game, and you can't do that without playing the game.

Right! What the h3ll are we arguing about? LOL

[t_niehoff]

Terence writes in response to James:

You're arguing over analogies. There's more commonality than difference between the two disciplines in my experience.

Learn a set of tools

Apply a set of tools

Learn from applying your set of tools

Apply a set of tools

repeat.

One learns medicine through its practice.




Hey Andrew, I'm not arguing over analogies -- I'm saying that he (James) used an analogy, and it is flawed. I didn't offer an analogy. WCK is an athletic, physical activity and I said that to develop skill in an athletic, phhysical activity (any athletic, physical activity, including those I cited as examples), we need to treat it as such. You learn and develop physical skill by practicing the skill. Skill is the application.

I don't even like the "tool" analogy you used (any longer - though I once used it myself)! That's part of the TMA "view" which separates everything, including movement (tool) from function(result). They're skills: movement to get the result (your ability to *do* something, to get a result). So why not call them skills? When you learn basketball do you learn and develop "basketball tools" then leanr to use those tools? Or do you learn the skills (the things you need to be able to *do*) that you need to play the game? The trouble with calling things by something other than what they are is that it only encourages confusion.

[MrBump]

Really odd arguments going on here...

Are people suggesting that the only way to learn how to fight is to go out onto the street and start trouble? Because otherwise, the only argument is over which inherently flawed training system is less good...

:rolleyes:

[zuti car]

Kambun Uechi , founder of of Uechi ryu karate style practiced only katas(forms) and and special form of trainig for strengthening the body (kote kitai) . He did not learned to figt thru sparring or fighting , he praciticed only karas( 3 katas - sanchin , seisan , sanjuruoku0 . He had two fights during his life, in first fight he killed two men , and because of that he left China , in a second fight he seriously injured the man who attacked him .

[SAAMAG]

And this version of history is backed up how? Hopefully not by word of mouth--because we all know how reiliable that is.

And no one is saying to go around the streets and fight people. We're saying the only way to be able to use your system of fighting, to find your strengths and weaknesses in regards to that style, is to get in there and rough it up. Meaning that the training MUST provide drilling and moreso fighting/sparring against resisting opponents who are of the same skill or better.

The reason people are probably so vehemently saying this in the wing chun forum, is because we all practice wing chun in some form or fashion, and probably don't like seeing the crap that's getting all the press right now.

[AndrewS]

Terence writes:


I don't even like the "tool" analogy you used (any longer - though I once used it myself)! That's part of the TMA "view" which separates everything, including movement (tool) from function(result). They're skills: movement to get the result (your ability to *do* something, to get a result). So why not call them skills? When you learn basketball do you learn and develop "basketball tools" then leanr to use those tools? Or do you learn the skills (the things you need to be able to *do*) that you need to play the game? The trouble with calling things by something other than what they are is that it only encourages confusion

Are you a Heidigger fan now?
;-)

Strength, speed, power, endurance- these are tools. They can be used to develop other tools- jab in boxing, jab in MMA, shoot in wrestling, shoot in MMA, etc.

While you are correct that A does not equal B, A equals A, I think we are quibbling over language. Put GPP qualities in the center of a big Venn diagram, SPP off in the direction of each individual combat pursuit, and skills outside off each SPP bubble, with areas of overlap at each level (and make the whole thing in 3 space)- that's a rough idea of the hierarchy of what consider 'tools'.


SJR writes:

What I meant was, if the boxer wins, obviously with strikes, it will be base don attributes developed via drills, not sparring.

Mmm, I think hours of sparring people, learning to deliver power on the fly and keep out of range using footwork would play a significant role in that outcome. Do you know any martial arts naive twins?

Andrew

[MrBump]

Fighting and sparing aren't the same thing. So again, it comes down to the degree of realism that you're willing to settle for, if you want to use that argument.

Personally I think that it's easily possible to engage in hard training that gets you close to fighting, without the dangers or social irresponsibility that fighting brings.

[k gledhill]

I became Mr Beans evil twin :D

[Mr Punch]

I'm more lover than fighter for sure bro:) ...I like to think that's where my expertise lies too... ;)

Anyway, no worries bro, fair enough answer. Like I said, I was just asking you what you thought gave you any insight into the subject of reality as you'd already said you weren't quite at any level of reality in your own training paradigm. Your mention of contact sparring and the rest of that post has answered that question.

And sure, I was comparing UFC to street fights and to WC training but as I pointed out to HW8, the MMA training, even for a rank (and file) amateur like me was far more intense than any of the numerous WC lines I've witnessed, so I don't think it's unfair to compare them. Of course, according to HW8, this just means I've never seen The Real Wing Chun :rolleyes:... which is, of course, utter delusional bollocks.

[WaveWingChun]

I am taught that drills are important and done ad naseum so they become second nature to you and you don't have to think about it. If you follow Tiger Woods around he probably hits 500 8 irons with a draw to them... in a row. Tennis players do the same thing where they hit specific shots time after time in practice so that the muscle memory is there for competition. Of course, Tiger Woods wants to prove himself in competition. I don't take WC for competition, so I'm not really worried about proving its worth in competition.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am taught that drills are important and done ad naseum so they become second nature to you and you don't have to think about it. If you follow Tiger Woods around he probably hits 500 8 irons with a draw to them... in a row. Tennis players do the same thing where they hit specific shots time after time in practice so that the muscle memory is there for competition. Of course, Tiger Woods wants to prove himself in competition. I don't take WC for competition, so I'm not really worried about proving its worth in competition.

Competition is not just about proving, its a test ground, the highest caliber testing ground and it is vital, even more so for the novices.
testing in your own kwoon is not the same thing.