Wing Chun defense against powerful hooks.

[Hardwork108]

I would like to know what your preferences are as far as using WING CHUN techniques against powerful hooks that are strong enough to break your structure if you are unsuccessful.

Furthermore, I have seen comments in the past here in the forum about using bong with wu sao( double handed) against hooks. Who amongst you prefers to use this technique and why?

[Paul T England]

Biu sau works well.

I show Tan first then biu later both work and you can't beat if if the structure is good.

I also like the idea of Tan and Pak to shoulder...

The bottom line is that you should strike at same time so your "blocking/covering" arm does not do all the work (eggs in one basket)

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[LSWCTN1]

its a difficult question to answer....

for the point of giving an answer, I will presume you mean you are both facing each other

if you mean a wild haymaker like an average drunk street fighter may use, then stepping in quickly with an uplifting palm to the chin can work,

alternatively, the forward Wu Sau after the Tan in SNT, coupled with a pivot and strike will

A) move you away from the strike
B) attack the attackers arm (and hurt them like hell - I, unfortunately, speak from experience:o)
C) strike them

all the best

david

[RGVWingChun]

I usually show the tan sao first, but then explain that if the opponent is taller that the tan sao has a small void in the tan sao structure that a taller opponent can exploit. For taller opponents I prefer the Biu Sao or the Wu Sao

All the best,

Moses

[golgo]

I find this a bit interesting as this is the kind of stuff I am getting into right now at class.

It was my understanding that for a higher hook, the biu sao is better than the tan sao in terms of structure, but the tan may be better if you have less time to react. This seems to hold true for me in drills, as the biu sau seems to be my most natural reaction even though I have trained the tan much more (through the SLT & drills, etc.).

Last night was my first real work with the bong sau and I believe that Sifu said that it shouldn't be used against a hook. I can't remember why though (perhaps the angle of the punch would go over top/around the bong sao?) It may have just been that he didn't want us using it for the specific drill we were doing.

[RGVWingChun]

yeah....bong sao is a mid level deflection that is used for straight line attacks. It has no energy that goes out to stop a hook attack at all. Definitely NOT a defense for outside gate attacks

Moses

[jet64]

actually it is not that difficult, try to understand this.

in order for your opponent to do that is to come closer...
if your opponent can hit you w/ a hook that means you can hit him w/ a jab or straight punch.

and if you understand WC verywell you'll know that at that distance you will land first.

its offense, become defense.

timing and speed is WC advantage :)




peace to all :)

[m1k3]

Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands? :confused:

Punch with the hand on the same side as the hook and use a pak close your face with the opposite hand as a cover. If the punch connects is should diffuse the hook, if it doesn't the pak will eat most of the force.

[t_niehoff]

Here's a different perspective . . .

I think the very question itself expresses a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and method of WCK. WCK isn't an "outside", free-movement, stand-up fighting method (like boxing, kickboxing) although that is how many/most appraoch it. Only in that domain does this sort of question make sense. When people ask these sorts of questions, their base assumption is that WCK is a form of boxing or kickboxing. In my view, as we don't fight in the boxer's or kickboxer's range, we don't to deal with their weapons. (To me, this is sort of like asking how WCK deals with the staple guard pass. Answer: it doesn't.).

My perspective is that you don't deal with or defend against powerful hooks. Just like you don't deal with jabs or crosses or kicks. That's not our game. Our game is to not permit the opponent to throw these things in the first place.

In stand-up, you are either going to be in an opponent's range or out of his range. If we are out of his range, he can't hit us so we don't need to block or parry or whatever. We just need to maintain that range (and look to set up our entry). However, anytime I am in an opponent's striking range I am in contact, actively controlling his bridges (weapons). If his bridges are under control, he can't hook or jab or cross or kick. Traditionally, the WCK strategy/method is to dap (join with and ride the bridges) and jeet (cut-off or close down his offense).

This is why asking a greco-roman guy how he deals with a hook would get the same sort of answer.

FWIW, if bil saos and tan saos and those sorts of movements worked in boxing/kickboxing range, boxers and kickboxers would be already using those movements. They don't work with any consistency on the outside. And when you are able to pull one off, it just exposes you to #2.

[taojkd]

I was shown in a muay thai class to punch the shoulder of the hooking arm and raise your punching arm so it covers your face. I can see either doing a Punch with Pak Sao or Biu Tze. Also, stepping away from the power of the punch. If I can do that with boxing gloves on and diffuse the hook's power, then open hand for the street should work fine.

Also, I have seen muay thai use a biu tze, stepping away from the hook, and then with the biu hand they overhook the elbow of the hooking arm and pull the opponent into a knee or elbow strike. They exploit the centrifugal force of the hook punch to pull their opponent off balance, kinda like a lop sau with boxing gloves.

[t_niehoff]

I was shown in a muay thai class to punch the shoulder of the hooking arm and raise your punching arm so it covers your face. I can see either doing a Punch with Pak Sao or Biu Tze. Also, stepping away from the power of the punch. If I can do that with boxing gloves on and diffuse the hook's power, then open hand for the street should work fine.

Also, I have seen muay thai use a biu tze, stepping away from the hook, and then with the biu hand they overhook the elbow of the hooking arm and pull the opponent into a knee or elbow strike. They exploit the centrifugal force of the hook punch to pull their opponent off balance, kinda like a lop sau with boxing gloves.

What the muay thai guys are doing is not a biu sao.

Is what the thai's do how you learned the biu sao? Is it how you practice the movement in the WCK drills? Of course not.

I could show you that BJJ guys can defend the staple pass by pushing the passing leg with the palm and say that looks like a gum sao -- but it's not a gum sao.

[golgo]

Here's a different perspective . . .

I think the very question itself expresses a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and method of WCK. WCK isn't an "outside", free-movement, stand-up fighting method (like boxing, kickboxing) although that is how many/most appraoch it. Only in that domain does this sort of question make sense. When people ask these sorts of questions, their base assumption is that WCK is a form of boxing or kickboxing. In my view, as we don't fight in the boxer's or kickboxer's range, we don't to deal with their weapons. (To me, this is sort of like asking how WCK deals with the staple guard pass. Answer: it doesn't.).

My perspective is that you don't deal with or defend against powerful hooks. Just like you don't deal with jabs or crosses or kicks. That's not our game. Our game is to not permit the opponent to throw these things in the first place.

In stand-up, you are either going to be in an opponent's range or out of his range. If we are out of his range, he can't hit us so we don't need to block or parry or whatever. We just need to maintain that range (and look to set up our entry). However, anytime I am in an opponent's striking range I am in contact, actively controlling his bridges (weapons). If his bridges are under control, he can't hook or jab or cross or kick. Traditionally, the WCK strategy/method is to dap (join with and ride the bridges) and jeet (cut-off or close down his offense).

This is why asking a greco-roman guy how he deals with a hook would get the same sort of answer.

FWIW, if bil saos and tan saos and those sorts of movements worked in boxing/kickboxing range, boxers and kickboxers would be already using those movements. They don't work with any consistency on the outside. And when you are able to pull one off, it just exposes you to #2.

Please excuse my ignorance/inexperience, but isn't this a bit "idealistic?" By this I mean, that while this may be a core principle - limiting and controling your opponent's actions, it would seem that if you are dealing with a skilled opponent who throws big hooks you are going to eventually have to deal with his hooks.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands? :confused: (m1k3)



***NO, not blocking the hook (preferably with a bil-lop motion near/at the inside cruk of his elbow) falls into the trap of possibly getting knocked out.

[t_niehoff]

Please excuse my ignorance/inexperience, but isn't this a bit "idealistic?" By this I mean, that while this may be a core principle - limiting and controling your opponent's actions, it would seem that if you are dealing with a skilled opponent who throws big hooks you are going to eventually have to deal with his hooks.

You will need to deal with his hooks if you are in that range (boxing/kickboxing range). And if you are in that range, you will find that you need to do what boxers and kickboxers do -- they've figured it out since they've spent so much time there. My point is that we don't work in that range, we avoid that range. WCK's method is an attached fighting method; it works when we are in close, in contact, actively trying to control an opponent. Look at it this way, if you are not in contact, you can't be doing WCK.

[LSWCTN1]

Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands? :confused:

Punch with the hand on the same side as the hook and use a pak close your face with the opposite hand as a cover. If the punch connects is should diffuse the hook, if it doesn't the pak will eat most of the force.

a la Joe Louis? or Philly Shell? thats the name i was taught for what i think your trying to say in boxing

however blocking the hook is a necessity, its not chasing hands - IMHO its covering

for example if you use the wu sau i mentioned earlier, you wouldnt carry it forward all the way to the attacking hand if the hook aborts, or your strike gets there first (as it should) and gets the knockout, you would put it as far out as necessary to cover without breaking out of your own structure

of course, i think we are all presuming that you are talking about facing the attacker

[golgo]

You will need to deal with his hooks if you are in that range (boxing/kickboxing range). And if you are in that range, you will find that you need to do what boxers and kickboxers do -- they've figured it out since they've spent so much time there. My point is that we don't work in that range, we avoid that range. WCK's method is an attached fighting method; it works when we are in close, in contact, actively trying to control an opponent. Look at it this way, if you are not in contact, you can't be doing WCK.

Gotcha. Thx

[t_niehoff]

It's been my experience that just about everyone knows the WCK curriculum (aka "the system") which is the forms, drills, kuit, etc. But not many know the method (faat). And I think that if you don't START with the method, you can't make any real progress since the method is WHAT we are trying to do (the curriculum only provides the movements for doing that).

Actually, the method (faat) of WCK is a very natural and intuitive one. We all will do it if put into the right circumstances (just like ground and pound is a natural and intuitive method). And the first thing I do with anyone I train is to get them to see the method for themselves. This is how I introduce it.

I get a wiffle ball bat (a plastic one) and tell the trainee to imagine that it is a real baseball bat. I tell them I am going to try and hit them with it, and they are to try to fight me in whatever way they want (they are empty handed and must remain standing - that is no shooting in to take me down). And we spar. Everyone I've done this with has done the same thing -- they stay out of range of the bat, they don't try to block or parry the bat, they look for an opportunity to enter, and when they do get in they control the bat. When I ask them "why didn't you just charge in with punches?" they reply "because you'd hit me with the bat!". When I ask "why didn't you do this or that?" they have the same reply. Intuitively they recognize to stay out of range (where it is safe) or get in and control the bat.

Ask they "how do you deal with a swing?" or"how do you deal with a jab?" from tha bat and you'll get the same answer: you don't.

What do they do when they get in and control the bat? Control the bat while trying to hit me.

Before people start saying that this isn't realisitc, let me say I agree and only do it to show something -- an approach. I do this to show them that this basic approach is something they already know, just like GNP. I tell them they've just shown me the WCK method. And what WCK training does is develop the individual's ability (skills) to use it, to control an opponent while striking them.

FWIW, WCK has the same approach iwith the knives and pole.

[Wilson]

That's some good stuff T.

I've been working this method, but never had a good analogy or a good explanation for people stuck in the WC is boxing/kickboxing mind.

ps - I love boxing/kickboxing (from the outside)!

[Knifefighter]

What do they do when they get in and control the bat? Control the bat while trying to hit me.

FWIW, WCK has the same approach iwith the knives and pole.

Bingo... which is precisely why I'm not a big fan of WC.

[Hardwork108]

Biu sau works well.

One of the ways that I was taught was to use a Bil Da. The Bil intercepts the elbow joint of the incoming hook while stepping in at 45 degree angle with the Da aimed at throat or neck area if possible. The force of the attacker´s strike is "borrowed" to facilitated the pivoting for the block and to add to the power of the counter strike.



I show Tan first then biu later both work and you can't beat if if the structure is good.

I find that there is more chance of the Tan collapsing if the opponent is big and his hook very powerful, but maybe that is just me.

[Hardwork108]

Last night was my first real work with the bong sau and I believe that Sifu said that it shouldn't be used against a hook. I can't remember why though (perhaps the angle of the punch would go over top/around the bong sao?) It may have just been that he didn't want us using it for the specific drill we were doing.

To be honest the bong sao is not the first block that comes to mind when in a hook defense scenario but I have seen some posts here in the forum from people who have have talked about this kind of application using bong/wu sao.

I suppose that it could work if one steps in and turns his bong/towards the incoming hook. Of course he would then have to counterattack instantly as not to get killed.;)

[Hardwork108]

Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands? :confused:

Not if you are surprised and the strike is about to hit you. Of course there are other options if you forsee the hook.


Punch with the hand on the same side as the hook and use a pak close your face with the opposite hand as a cover. If the punch connects is should diffuse the hook, if it doesn't the pak will eat most of the force.

I believe that a powerful hook can collapse the pack and may leave one in a difficult position from which to recover.

Of course if you forsee the hook and hit the assailant before he has a chance to complete his attack, using your pack just as a cover then it might be a different story.

[Wu Wei Wu]

Excellent posts from T Niehoff.

And thinking in terms of techniques (use Biu Sao, Taan Sau etc...) and not in terms of principles is tantamount to "chasing hands".

The question shouldn't be "what to do, to deal with a hook?" but how to prevent a person from being able to use the hook effectively. Or even better would be, "how to use Wing Chun in such a way as to prevent the opponent presenting any risk?"

Suki

[Hardwork108]

And thinking in terms of techniques (use Biu Sao, Taan Sau etc...) and not in terms of principles is tantamount to "chasing hands".

There are the principles and then there are the tools. Without the tools - TECHNIQUES - you cannot hope to use the principles in a fight.

That is why the techniques are part of this art!

At an advanced level one may not even need to block most attacks but my question was assuming the NEED to block. Have you never blocked an incoming attack during your WC training/sparring?

If you block and Da successfuly does that mean that you chased hands?


The question was referring specifically to the tools/techniques with an automatic assumption that there was a NEED for a block in the first place.

I believe that most of us know that if you see the hook coming you can simply angle and straight punch(even kick) the opponent using the Wing Chun principles, but again that was NOT the question!


The question shouldn't be "what to do, to deal with a hook?" but how to prevent a person from being able to use the hook effectively. Or even better would be, "how to use Wing Chun in such a way as to prevent the opponent presenting any risk?"

However, the question WAS about the technical aspect of blocking the hook as it was not a general question on using the principles of WC!

[Liddel]

I see T's point with regard to the range but have experienced sparring partners launching and landing hooks from my close VT range so take that for what its worth.

Sip Sau is what works well for me.....its the first engaging action of the dummy (a rising Wu if you will - like a tight head guard - you may have another name for it)
I use this because of the range in which i am applyin it...quite close, heads almost touching limited elbow space etc.

For perspective on the hook im talking about - i mean very similar to how Rampage knocked out Wandy. Using a tight head guard stepping inside the opponent and using a tight hook...This is my VT close range any closer and your in clinch.

This is the most difficult hook for me to deal with because hes close and taking my space somewhat. Hooks from a further out range are easier for me IME.

With regard to the Sip Sao im using the same side lead leg to insure as much structured support from my base because the hook is mucho heavy, im also trying to launch my own attack elbow or straight punch or palm (chin jab) with the other side time permitting (sometimes i just dont see it and can only cover up)

Immediatly after the hook makes contact with my Sip it fires foward in attack unless im caught and in lala land for a sec LOL.

Any action you want to use must be short and small. My Sip is only inches higher than my pose or guard when facing a guy i turn to create a good angle to minimise the force recieved and to lend momentum to the other attacking side...if all go's to plan :)

One other thing ive learnt in sparring certain partners of mine is that the Sip serves me well when i read my opponents intentions wrong...in that the Sip has my elbow down protecting my ribs if its not a head shot... ive rasied my arm too much and been caught in the ribs and its not that fun LOL....so it is a good action for me :)

What ever ther action you prefer to use it must be quick and solid, hooks aren't as slow as some VT folks will have you beleive because of the straight line concepts we have....and can be launched from several different ranges.

P.S i won 50 bucks on Rampage and that was IMO perfect tech man, slipped three punches with the head gaurd stepped in a ka Blamm....Awesome UFC.

Bring on Fedor at the end of this month :cool:

DREW

[Edmund]

Everyone I've done this with has done the same thing -- they stay out of range of the bat, they don't try to block or parry the bat, they look for an opportunity to enter, and when they do get in they control the bat.

Well the big problem with that example/experiment is that a bat will hurt their arm if it was real. They aren't going to try block it because a real bat would usually injure their arm and they would not be able to use it to keep fighting.

They are going to try enter and control the bat because they are at an obvious disadvantage when they are weaponless and you've got this bat to swing at them. You can't swing it so well while they are hanging on.

While it may convince some people of the concept of closing the distance, you still need techniques for defence against strikes.

[taojkd]

What the muay thai guys are doing is not a biu sao.

Is what the thai's do how you learned the biu sao? Is it how you practice the movement in the WCK drills? Of course not.

I could show you that BJJ guys can defend the staple pass by pushing the passing leg with the palm and say that looks like a gum sao -- but it's not a gum sao.

I learned the Biu sao first before going to mma/muay thai. It was either Biu, Wu, or Tan Da. I prefer the Biu and it works just fine in MT/Boxing/MMA. So, yes, this is how i do (did) practice the movement in WCK drills.

I don't consider this to be chasing hands as i'm getting bridge contact with the hook. Actually, I'm not chasing for a bridge, the opponent is giving me a bridge.

And a nice lop sao after with the Biu/Wu/Tan disrupts my opponents structure.


ive rasied my arm too much and been caught in the ribs and its not that fun

Good point. I can see that happen very easily. Will have to remember that :)

[JPinAZ]

I think I understand where T is coming from, but not sure I agree with what was written:


My perspective is that you don't deal with or defend against powerful hooks. Just like you don't deal with jabs or crosses or kicks. That's not our game. Our game is to not permit the opponent to throw these things in the first place

IMO, this is theoretical nonsense. If someone wants to throw a punch, you have to deal with them or you get hit. Whether it's with bridging, stepping away, moving into grappling range or trading punches. Anyone who's done even 10 seconds of sparring/fighting would know that you can't 'not permit' punches from being thrown. It would be nice, but this is the real world.. This is like say "WCK avoids the grappling range".... better hope you know how to deal with it when it happens, and it will, because nobody's perfect. unless this is what you implying?
I get it if he's implying that you don't want to let the punch even get off, but that's not very realistic, regardless what 'style' you train


You will need to deal with his hooks if you are in that range (boxing/kickboxing range). And if you are in that range, you will find that you need to do what boxers and kickboxers do -- they've figured it out since they've spent so much time there. My point is that we don't work in that range, we avoid that range. WCK's method is an attached fighting method; it works when we are in close, in contact, actively trying to control an opponent. Look at it this way, if you are not in contact, you can't be doing WCK.

Again, IMO - nonsense. You don't need to trade punches or bob and weave (like boxers do) just because a hook is thrown. Actually, the flaw in the above thinking is, if one understands the true value in WC teaching, they will realize there is no 'kick boxing range' or 'boxing range' or even a 'WC range' - you can either hit or you can't, it's not about what style you are using. It's about occupying space, gate theory, structure, correct body alignment, etc. From WC perspective, it's not about different styles, it's just physics.

Example: Kicking can be done from further out or closer in (round house or thrust kick compared to a hitting kick when in close). Same with punching, there are short range and long range punches - you can either hit or you can't. There's no such thing as a 'boxing range', there's just striking range or outside striking range. And WC can deal with all of these - by understnading the concepts. No need to bounce around, bob/weave, whatever just because someone threw a hook.

One is using WC if understnad hte concepts, whether they are in 'striking range' or not. We can still set up solid structure and occupy space as well as set up correct alignment to our oponent outside of striking range. So yes, I we can still use WC when we are not 'in close' or 'in contact' with our opponent. Anyone who says otherwise is treating WC just like it's kickboxing, and that it turns on and off depending on range, hasn't a clue what WC is all about ;)
-----------------------
As far as a response to defense against a hook, one would have to make some assumptions. First, you'd have to assume that the hook is the first/leading attack and there is no bridge yet. Also would assume they have to step in with this hook to get to a range they can hit me with it. As well as assuming they are hooking to my head, and that there was time to set up a defensive guard before the strike was thrown.

If this is the case, I would use gate thoeries to tell me where the attack is coming from. Here one could use a variety of tools, but they always are driven from the principals. Do I have time to move my feet much? If not, then responses are most likely driven from 4-gate theory, 5-line theory, etc: First defend on center then sweep the gate with strong structure conected to my body (most likely with a biu sau as tan is more of a redirect after a bridge is made). A shift in my horse to recieve & redirect the energy would also be needed, and also occupy center with the opposite hand since I shifted my facing slightly and the biu hand left center. If the opposite hand hits the opponent, it hits. If not then at least I have covered my gates and created a bridge. From this point, what I feel on the bridge and what I feel on my hand occupying center tells me what to do from there.

JP

[punchdrunk]

good response JP. I agree there are a lot of assumptions in the question, there are lots of different hooks afterall. Gate theory and understanding range will give the applicable answer.
As for using a bong sau or a kwan sao against a hook Iwas taught that while it might happen in the chaos of a fight it was flawed and left you wide open to follow ups. So the answer was to kick and then change right away if you ever did it.
Mostly I'd have to say I use tan sao or bui sao... but you couold also have to use an elbow strike or whatever, really there are lots of hooks from different ranges, heights and angles. Shoot add in multiple opponents and not facing and there are more variations as well.

[RGVWingChun]

Here's a different perspective . . .

I think the very question itself expresses a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and method of WCK. WCK isn't an "outside", free-movement, stand-up fighting method (like boxing, kickboxing) although that is how many/most appraoch it. Only in that domain does this sort of question make sense. When people ask these sorts of questions, their base assumption is that WCK is a form of boxing or kickboxing. In my view, as we don't fight in the boxer's or kickboxer's range, we don't to deal with their weapons. (To me, this is sort of like asking how WCK deals with the staple guard pass. Answer: it doesn't.).

My perspective is that you don't deal with or defend against powerful hooks. Just like you don't deal with jabs or crosses or kicks. That's not our game. Our game is to not permit the opponent to throw these things in the first place.

In stand-up, you are either going to be in an opponent's range or out of his range. If we are out of his range, he can't hit us so we don't need to block or parry or whatever. We just need to maintain that range (and look to set up our entry). However, anytime I am in an opponent's striking range I am in contact, actively controlling his bridges (weapons). If his bridges are under control, he can't hook or jab or cross or kick. Traditionally, the WCK strategy/method is to dap (join with and ride the bridges) and jeet (cut-off or close down his offense).

This is why asking a greco-roman guy how he deals with a hook would get the same sort of answer.

FWIW, if bil saos and tan saos and those sorts of movements worked in boxing/kickboxing range, boxers and kickboxers would be already using those movements. They don't work with any consistency on the outside. And when you are able to pull one off, it just exposes you to #2.

This is just a horrible answer I think. Sure, the opponent might be out of range but when the opponent throws his punch he isn't just standing there. He is changing his range while bringing that hook and putting his body weight into it if he knows what he doing. If that is the case, then you have to have balance and good rooting BEHIND your hand techniques to give them any power at all and support their structure. A good hook, either way, is not a "hay maker" but one thrown at close range with his elbow behind his fist as he is swinging from the outside.

And last time I "asked" a Greco-Roman guy to deal with a punch he couldn't...

Moses

[t_niehoff]

Worth a read . . .

http://stevemorris.livejournal.com/17701.html

[t_niehoff]

I see T's point with regard to the range but have experienced sparring partners launching and landing hooks from my close VT range so take that for what its worth.


I'm sure they do land hooks against "your close VT range" and that's because you are not controlling their bridges. Anytime you are in range, you need to control the opponent's bridges.

[t_niehoff]

This is just a horrible answer I think. Sure, the opponent might be out of range but when the opponent throws his punch he isn't just standing there. He is changing his range while bringing that hook and putting his body weight into it if he knows what he doing.


And if we know what we're doing we aren't standing there either -- we are keeping the range (staying out of his range), moving as he moves. And should he ever breach that range, then I move in and close him down.



If that is the case, then you have to have balance and good rooting BEHIND your hand techniques to give them any power at all and support their structure. A good hook, either way, is not a "hay maker" but one thrown at close range with his elbow behind his fist as he is swinging from the outside.


Blocking doesn't work reliably or consistently. And even if you do pull one off, it will only leave you in a poor position.

[t_niehoff]

Well the big problem with that example/experiment is that a bat will hurt their arm if it was real. They aren't going to try block it because a real bat would usually injure their arm and they would not be able to use it to keep fighting.


The point of using the bat is that it will blast its way through your blocks -- as will a powerful hook -- so people know better than to try and block. I actually got the idea of the bat from one of my guys who said after sparring with a rather large, strong guy "man, he was swinging bats out there!"



They are going to try enter and control the bat because they are at an obvious disadvantage when they are weaponless and you've got this bat to swing at them. You can't swing it so well while they are hanging on.


Yes, they recognize that they are at a disadvantage trying to trade with someone weilding a bat. Just like it may be a disadvantage to trade with someone who is larger and stronger. ;)

The other aspect is that when you get in and control the bat -- or his bridges -- the game changes. He no longer has an advantage.



While it may convince some people of the concept of closing the distance, you still need techniques for defence against strikes.

The bat exercise isn't to convince anyone; it is merely an illustration that the method or strategy is one that is natural and intuitive.

As I said, WCK's method is to not permit him to strike. If you get it and control him, you don't need to deal with his strikes (just like if you get in and control the bat you don't need to deal with his strikes).

[t_niehoff]

I think I understand where T is coming from, but not sure I agree with what was written:


You have absolutely no clue, none, nada, nil. etc. as to where I am coming from. Nor do you or could you have any idea or understanding about what I wrote. I am so far removed in my training and approach from anything remotely resembling HFY or its "paradigm"/formula/concept/etc. that we might as well be from different planets. If you want to share your perspective -- fine. But I would prefer to have nothing to do with you or other HFY people. So don't cite me, refer to me, respond to my posts, or have anything to do with me. And if you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
"My perspective is that you don't deal with or defend against powerful hooks. Just like you don't deal with jabs or crosses or kicks. That's not our game. Our game is to not permit the opponent to throw these things in the first place."

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

AND JPinAZ's RESPONSE:


"IMO, this is theoretical nonsense. If someone wants to throw a punch, you have to deal with them or you get hit. Whether it's with bridging, stepping away, moving into grappling range or trading punches. Anyone who's done even 10 seconds of sparring/fighting would know that you can't 'not permit' punches from being thrown. It would be nice, but this is the real world."


***JP is 100% correct. Terence is completely off on this matter.

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

So again, as in post#13 on page 1 of this thread (and returning to the theme of the thread: "how to deal with hooks"?):

Originally Posted by m1k3
"Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands?

***NO, not blocking the hook (preferably with a bil-lop motion near/at the inside cruk of his elbow) falls into the trap of possibly getting knocked out.

And btw, for this to work well your centerline must be turned to almost directly face the point of contact on his elbow that you're blocking/lopping - while you're moving forward towards the point of contact.

This puts your other hand in position to strike back virtually simultaneously.

[Phil Redmond]

yeah....bong sao is a mid level deflection that is used for straight line attacks. It has no energy that goes out to stop a hook attack at all. Definitely NOT a defense for outside gate attacks

Moses
Bong can be high, mid-level or low.

[Liddel]

I'm sure they do land hooks against "your close VT range" and that's because you are not controlling their bridges. Anytime you are in range, you need to control the opponent's bridges.

Ahh... that would be "In" close VT range. I dont pretend that i never get hit...
cause no one ever landed a hook against you when in real close huh T ? WTF LOL

No need to knee jerk buddy, with experienced opponents controlling a bridge is momentary at best IME...

Its just but one general example for this discussion mate...

DREW

[JPinAZ]

You have absolutely no clue, none, nada, nil. etc. as to where I am coming from. Nor do you or could you have any idea or understanding about what I wrote....WAA WAA WAA ......that as well be from different planets. If you want to share your perspective -- fine. But I would prefer to have nothing to do with you... WAA WAA WAA ....And if you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone.

You're absolutely right, I have no idea what you are talking about nor, what 'planet' you are from. Grow some friggin balls, this is a forum to discuss a fighting art, not a knitting class. I dissagreed with you, so what? I didn't know you were going to cry so hard by me joining the conversation. Here's a tissue. :rolleyes:

[JPinAZ]

***JP is 100% correct. Terence is completely off on this matter.

Cool :)



So again, as in post#13 on page 1 of this thread (and returning to the theme of the thread: "how to deal with hooks"?):

Originally Posted by m1k3
"Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands?

***NO, not blocking the hook (preferably with a bil-lop motion near/at the inside cruk of his elbow) falls into the trap of possibly getting knocked out.

And btw, for this to work well your centerline must be turned to almost directly face the point of contact on his elbow that you're blocking/lopping - while you're moving forward towards the point of contact.

This puts your other hand in position to strike back virtually simultaneously.

I can agree with this to an extent.
And in regards to M1k3 comment on chasing hands: I agree, you don't want to fall into that trap. As I see it, it's not chasing hands to cover your gates and set up a good structure to deal with the incoming energy while at the same time covering the line between you and your opponent - it's smart fighting and what WCK is all about.

[JPinAZ]

good response JP. I agree there are a lot of assumptions in the question, there are lots of different hooks afterall. Gate theory and understanding range will give the applicable answer.
As for using a bong sau or a kwan sao against a hook Iwas taught that while it might happen in the chaos of a fight it was flawed and left you wide open to follow ups. So the answer was to kick and then change right away if you ever did it.
Mostly I'd have to say I use tan sao or bui sao... but you couold also have to use an elbow strike or whatever, really there are lots of hooks from different ranges, heights and angles. Shoot add in multiple opponents and not facing and there are more variations as well.

I'd also agree that the bong or kwan sau can leave you open in the scenario I described. But as we all know, the scenario and conditions can change in a second, in which case the tools and shapes needed to deal with them might change. And, it's the concepts/principals that give us the answers as to which works most efficiently and effectively.

[cobra]

to stop the hook you have to deal with the force in relation to which way it is moving, which may cause you to feel you are chasing hands; however, if your other hand is chasing center and attacking simultaneously I believe this is acceptable and within the principles and concepts. Wing Chun was meant to be formless, so think about it in terms of principles and concepts and not techniques. Also, if you spend too much time on the bridge you may be chasing hands and not the center. Remember the idea is to cross the bridge, not to walk back and forth on it.

[Wayfaring]

Interesting discussion on the hook. I think the two basic WC related answers I'm hearing are to either move out of range of the hook so it doesn't hit you or to deal with it with structure with a biu / biu da response (if you can biu sau it you have a direct line to strike with da). The hook is absolutely in bridge range.

Either will probably work depending on the time frame. Or won't work depending on the time frame. A few mentioned assumptions about where they see the hook. I will say generally a hook is not the first punch thrown from the lead hand. A hook is also called the "3" punch in boxing/kickboxing. As in 1-2-3. So you see it a lot where people jab their way in from a distance or circle in, set up a straight punch with the 2, and a hook is an alternate attack off of that from a different angle. That I would say would be most common. Second most common I've seen would be setting it up off of slipping a straight 2 punch from your opponent. Third most common I've seen is from in close range, after a number of body shots, coming up to the head with a hook.

So if we're going to discuss approaches to handling the hook, it probably makes sense to talk about it in that type of context rather than a one-step non-alive response.

Interestingly enough, the basic muy thai response to the hook is more of a covering and rolling with it - against a left hook the right hand would come up against the right ear, turning slightly to the left and loading the left hand for a straight response. So muy thai players are assuming you're going to be behind in the timeframe off the hook and plan accordingly.

From a straight WC perspective, attacking centerline you can get there sooner in a straight line than a round punch. This is true. However, I've found in practice that boxing type combinations can throw your reaction time off just enough where you don't start your straight punch in time because you're reacting to the previous punch. Isn't there like an average 0.2s reaction time to humans? So if the combination comes faster than that, you can't assume you'll be ahead of it. You can cheat it a little and see the hook from the opponents shoulder movement, but with my attributes I can't always assume I'll be ahead of the hook.

The other thing with boxing combinations are that usually the jab and the cross (1 and 2 punches) are slightly outside of bridge range. The hook and uppercuts (3 and 4) are inside of bridge range. And boxers punch themselves into range. So how do we deal with that?

Anyway, a few other points and considerations to discuss. I have opinions on answers to these things but want to hear others responses.

[kung fu fighter]

I would like to know what your preferences are as far as using WING CHUN techniques against powerful hooks that are strong enough to break your structure if you are unsuccessful.

Furthermore, I have seen comments in the past here in the forum about using bong with wu sao( double handed) against hooks. Who amongst you prefers to use this technique and why?


Great topic spencer,

A hooker would rock most wing chun peoples world:D! 99% of wing chun people are not used to angular punches such as hooks because of the amount of time spent on defending and throwing straight punches.

In a fight my main intention is to read the attacker's intent and then preventing him from completing his action, either by intercepting him early or by obstructing his line of attack using wing chun gate theory.

if i was able to catch the attacker's intent to throw a hook early enough (before his physical action started) I would just simply hit him directly. if the hook was already in motion physically, in my opinion biu da would be structurally the most sound technique to use. A downward tan sao from the 3rd section of slt is also a good option. Bong sao would definately not be my first choice to initially stop a hook punch. simply because the bong structure is not meant to support the line of force from a hook in my opinion. instead a upward man sao wu sao combo would be more appropreate choice of technique to deflect the hook upward off it's line of force. kwan sau sau work good as well. But make sure you turn to face the incoming line of force. in wing chun angles are extreamely important.

[Mr Punch]

I'm with T.

Discussing techs to deal with a hook is somewhat futile. Yes, there are covers, and there are ways of riding or facilitating riding hooks, but there is no one tech that's going to stop one. Any of you talking about using a biu or tan on the crook of the elbow/bicep must be talking about a big swinging haymaking rear-hand hook... there's no way you're getting one of those on a tight, lead-leg left hook, esp not coming in from down by the blind spot by your right hip.

Jamming his body up, not letting him get the structure he wants. That's far less idealistic than saying, 'He does this, I do this...' chasing hands kind of stuff.

Of course, if you fail, your going to eat one, which is where biu, tan and even a high bong (a la Lo Man Kam/Duncan Leung (?) school) can come in handy as a panic reflex to somewhat absorb/redirect the damage and maybe even bat it away or drive through it if you're stronger than them.

Incidental techs that I've found have worked against a good tight left hook for me have included dropping an elbow straight down on their head (for boxers who duck low as part of the combo). I wouldn't recommend it though. Principles over techniques anyday.

[Edmund]

As I said, WCK's method is to not permit him to strike. If you get it and control him, you don't need to deal with his strikes (just like if you get in and control the bat you don't need to deal with his strikes).


You think it's idealistic to have techniques vs hook. It's just as idealistic to think you won't have to defend against hooks because on principle you won't permit the opponent to throw one.

Nothing is bound to work all the time and there will be situations where you have to defend against a hook and situations where you stopped the opponent from throwing one in the first place.

The principles of WC would say you can kick anyone's ass in two seconds while puffing on cigarette.

If the guy's hook is so fast and powerful that it's futile to defend it, how do you well do you think controlling the guy is going to go? Suddenly he's blubber as soon as you get ahold of him?

[duende]

I'm sure they do land hooks against "your close VT range" and that's because you are not controlling their bridges. Anytime you are in range, you need to control the opponent's bridges.


For someone who wants nothing to do with HFY, this sounds awfully familiar. :eek:

But don't worry Terence, I won't bother you anymore. :p



Whether you use spacing, range and angles of facing to jam up your opponent's bridge, or leverage on their COG to take away his body structure and power... this is controlling the bridge.

Sure simple techniques like Biu Da and Tan Da can work soley on a technique level....

But the bigger picture is where how do these techniques leave you after they are employed. What angles and leverage do they set up for dominating your opponent's bridge?? Or worse, what if they don't work.... what kind of safety belt do you have on for back up?? What kind of time space and energy do you have on your side to prevent yet another follow up attack??

I've seen many a video of a Tan Da technique against a hook where the WC practioner is wide open and begging for a follow-up upper cut. Also many Biu Da where the WC footwork is right there for the shoot.

Without the consideration of truly controlling the bridge and having a safety belt on, one can simply fall into looping and lucky punch timeframe which is often exactly what your opponent's game strategy is.


Momentary control, outside-the-box control, or direct inside-line control... these principles, understandings and training platforms are what make the bridging hand of Wing Chun (Kiu Sau, Chi Kiu, Chi Sau) for fighting and not merely a sensitivity drill.

[scottking]

[QUOTE=m1k3;906109]Isn't trying to block a hook falling into the trap of chasing hands? :confused:

not if it stops you getting smashed in thge face

[cobra]

Someone who can fight and throws a hook is probably not going to start with it from 6 ft away. If you are lucky you'll see it right before it hits you and you may be able to react with whatever tool is closest or just by angling your body and or head out of the way. Too many different possibilities to be able to say definitely anything. Or, you could simply intercept it with your face, hurts a bit though.

[m1k3]

I guess a lot of people took the chasing hands comment as "I think I'll stand there and let him hit me in the face". Well duh, of course that won't work.

But if you are worried about blocking his strikes you have already lost. You are being reactive, worried about what your opponent is doing and not playing your own game. That in my opinion is "chasing hands".

If you are playing your game, jamming your opponent and launching your own strikes or achieving some sort of clinch control you will probably eat less punches and they will not be as solid.

Someone on this site once said (I think it was Ernie) that your strategy should not be more complicated than "punch him in the nose".

The chasing hands analogy works in grappling also. If you are so focused on a move or so worried about avoiding a submission, you end up playing their game and more times than not losing.

K?:)

[Hardwork108]

Great topic spencer,

Thank you, but I am not Spencer!:eek:

[Hardwork108]

I'm sure they do land hooks against "your close VT range" and that's because you are not controlling their bridges. Anytime you are in range, you need to control the opponent's bridges.

And sometimes you will have to control their bridges by intercepting their strike (accompanied with an instant Da!).

[Hardwork108]

And if we know what we're doing we aren't standing there either -- we are keeping the range (staying out of his range), moving as he moves. And should he ever breach that range, then I move in and close him down.
That sounds like sparring. The way I was taught is that when you perceive the incoming strike you move in(in angle) instantly jam or block the blow and hit. Continue hitting until there is no more danger.

I was not taught to stay out of range.




Blocking doesn't work reliably or consistently.

I don´t think that anything works reliably or consistently in a fight, UNLESS you train for it hard!



And even if you do pull one off, it will only leave you in a poor position.

The object of moving in and blocking is to accompany your block with a hit followed by more hits.

[Hardwork108]

The point of using the bat is that it will blast its way through your blocks -- as will a powerful hook -- so people know better than to try and block.

I don´t agree with the bat training. As the man said, blocking a bat can break your arm so the game and the options change.

I started this thread knowing very well that a powerful hook can collapse one´s block/structure. However, powerfull hooks cannot collapse all structures!

So I wanted to know how people from the different WC schools would deal with such hooks and what blocks would work for them.

I always assume that hooks as well as other incoming strikes are going to be as powerful as adversary can deliver them. So when blocking one has to assume that it will be a haymaker.



As I said, WCK's method is to not permit him to strike. If you get it and control him, you don't need to deal with his strikes (just like if you get in and control the bat you don't need to deal with his strikes).

In real world scenarios there is sometimes no choice but to block. For example you may be caught off guard or you may not have room to stay out of range. My question assumes that you HAVE to block. What works best for you?

[kung fu fighter]

Thank you, but I am not Spencer!:eek:

Oops, my bad:D

[Hardwork108]

Oops, my bad:D

No problem.:)

By the way, where is Spencer? :confused:

[Phil Redmond]

You think it's idealistic to have techniques vs hook. It's just as idealistic to think you won't have to defend against hooks because on principle you won't permit the opponent to throw one.

Nothing is bound to work all the time and there will be situations where you have to defend against a hook and situations where you stopped the opponent from throwing one in the first place.

The principles of WC would say you can kick anyone's ass in two seconds while puffing on cigarette.

If the guy's hook is so fast and powerful that it's futile to defend it, how do you well do you think controlling the guy is going to go? Suddenly he's blubber as soon as you get ahold of him?
Good post. People have a tendency of thinking in absolutes. Everyone has a plan until they get hit. I was going to write something similar.
Thanks

[Wayfaring]

One other thing we haven't discussed related to this are hand coverings.
Gloves change things a little bit. It's a little different with 16oz boxing gloves, 8 oz MMA gloves, and bare knuckle. Sure principles don't change, but how do you adjust these depending on the padding on your hands?

[cobra]

Good point, also the weight of the gloves will increase the amount of force coming in. I think if you key on stopping at or close to the elbow, it should be the same. Of course you have the shouder too, just depends on how you are positioned in relation to the strike coming in and what is closest (your elbow, hand, shoulder), of course angling your body and/or head out of the way is quicker.

[Hardwork108]

One other thing we haven't discussed related to this are hand coverings.
Gloves change things a little bit. It's a little different with 16oz boxing gloves, 8 oz MMA gloves, and bare knuckle. Sure principles don't change, but how do you adjust these depending on the padding on your hands?

My assumption when I started this thread was that the scenario was a bareknuckle one, meaning street situation. I am sorry that I did not make it clear at the beginning.

However most of us train so that we can protect ourselves in the street hence the scenario.:)

[Hardwork108]

But if you are worried about blocking his strikes you have already lost. You are being reactive, worried about what your opponent is doing and not playing your own game. That in my opinion is "chasing hands".

This is how I was trained. I was taught to REACT but without worrying. Basically you just are! Or at least that is the state of mind you are aiming for. That means when it kicks you react in the appropriate (trained) way. You don´t chase hands but you avoid getting hit and sometimes this means blocking and attacking (ideally at the same time).

This is the scenario I had in mind when I started this thread.


Someone on this site once said (I think it was Ernie) that your strategy should not be more complicated than "punch him in the nose".

There is a lot of wisdom in that saying, of course keeping in mind that your assailant is more likely than not using the same strategy.;)

[Edmund]

I guess a lot of people took the chasing hands comment as "I think I'll stand there and let him hit me in the face". Well duh, of course that won't work.

But if you are worried about blocking his strikes you have already lost. You are being reactive, worried about what your opponent is doing and not playing your own game. That in my opinion is "chasing hands".


The opponent is throwing hooks. If you're throwing straight punches and not worrying about blocking, the punching paths aren't going to meet up.

Chances he might land his stuff are as likely as you might land yours. Basically 2 guys end up belting each other.

[LSWCTN1]

and there was me thinking that wing chun has no 'blocks'

i thought we just cover and/or deflect :eek:

at least thats what i have have been taught from two very distinctly seperate lineage's from two very good instructors.

a baseball bat couldn't be swung in the first place if you was in close enough - i'm not sure if i understand that argument in a realistic sense

of course using wc shapes against a bat would be pure stupidity, but its horses for courses. if someone swung a bat your insinct should be different to if someone swung a hook IMHO

[Phil Redmond]

Is this thread about a "tight" hook or a round punch? Some people call a round punch a "hook". There is a big difference.

[Mr Punch]

The opponent is throwing hooks. If you're throwing straight punches and not worrying about blocking, the punching paths aren't going to meet up.This is complete nonsense, which I find surprising from you.

Sure, if he's a total moron he's just going to be swinging haymakers... but we're not talking about fighting haymakers, but hooks, which in case you hadn't noticed often come with a set up involving at least a couple of straight punches. And that's not even taking into consideration the likelihood of a clash of arms when you meet his guard.

Slight rant (not aimed at you Edmund): It always cracks me up that a lot of chunners seem to have this idea that hooks are easy (or that they are really hard - some ultimate test of their chun!) and in some ways inferior, as well as such an anathema to chun. My chun has hooks. It does not have a specific cookie cutter 'hook defence' for reasons that Terrence and others now have explained.

In chun, if your straight punch (just hit him in the face, as people are saying) doesn't work, you change angles. How do you do that? You try and blast through, you can step off line or around, or you move your arm around the obstacle if it's too strong. My strike may fold to a bong sao that disappears into a chum jarn or something. In which case my elbow is avoiding his arm on a circular path (or spiral to be more exact). No different to a lot of people's hooking strategy: send out a jab or two, maybe a cross, and as they're avoided or stopped, I change the angle and hook around from on an unexpected vector (as likely as not, a spiralling hook). It's the same as wing chun.

The difference is most boxers practice by hitting each other and working out the angles from there, where most chunners are over-reliant on holding each other and working out the angles from there. Which is why you'd never get this kind of theoretical bollocks thread on a boxing forum.

/rant. :D


and there was me thinking that wing chun has no 'blocks'

i thought we just cover and/or deflect :eek:

at least thats what i have have been taught from two very distinctly seperate lineage's from two very good instructors...:)

Me too.

[Mr Punch]

Is this thread about a "tight" hook or a round punch? Some people call a round punch a "hook". There is a big difference.I assume a tight lead-leg hook, but could include a rear leg hook or a Russian hook. I'm not assuming big dopey haymakers, with two-day written notice.

[Phil Redmond]

I assume a tight lead-leg hook, but could include a rear leg hook or a Russian hook. I'm not assuming big dopey haymakers, with two-day written notice.
That's what I'm presuming as well. A tight hook is "similar" to the lan sao in SLT. It's virtually impossible to get inside it. My game plan is to try and keep my guard out so that he has to extend his arm out to hit me. (Notice I said game plan because things don't always happen like you plan in a fight). Once his arm is extended there are many options like a central line Biu Sao.

[Phil Redmond]

Here are some boxing versions of dealing with hooks.
Watch the Pak da around 2:35
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R78hdxpRfws

[Wayfaring]

One key to dealing with the hook is seeing it. This is totally along the lines of WC centerline and not chasing hands. If your focus is center, you can see the hook initiating from the shoulder or the hip and shoulder. If it's coming off a combination, you have to not flinch/blink/react to the preceding punches.

The Joe Louis clip is cool. From a WC perspective you can see how first he is more compact than all his opponents - elbows are in tighter so he has a shorter distance to travel to land punches. You can see the contrast of centerline type boxing vs. non-centerline type boxing. Next, you see how he maintains his structure against his opponents. He doesn't get overextended and his punches are from within his structure. That's like the WC box.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Here are some boxing versions of dealing with hooks.
Watch the Pak da around 2:35
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R78hdxpRfws

Great clip, some of that stuff is dangerous outside the boxing context but nevertheless, a fine example of great basic boxing from the great JL.
Of course, it helps when you can Knock the crap out of people with both hands.
Sometimes, "little things" like that get over looked.
;)

[Phil Redmond]

Great clip, some of that stuff is dangerous outside the boxing context but nevertheless, a fine example of great basic boxing from the great JL.
Of course, it helps when you can Knock the crap out of people with both hands.
Sometimes, "little things" like that get over looked.
;)
Def. I trained kickboxing at the gym in Bed-Stuy and the boxers used to slip punches by ducking underneath punches. In kickboxing you could get kicked or kneed (sp)? in the face. So there are things used in boxing that could get you hurt if legs are involved.
And yes, knockout power definitely counts. A less skilled fighter can get you if he has knockout power and you don't.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Def. I trained kickboxing at the gym in Bed-Stuy and the boxers used to slip punches by ducking underneath punches. In kickboxing you could get kicked or kneed (sp)? in the face. So there are things used in boxing that could get you hurt if legs are involved.
And yes, knockout power definitely counts. A less skilled fighter can get you if he has knockout power and you don't.

Not only that, people seem to forget that causing damage is the "only" way to truly disrupt the opponents structure, in a striking context.
You can't just "hit him" the strike MUST cause enough "damage" to stop him, compromise his structure.
Just hitting is not enough, just landing the strikes are not enough, they have to do something.

[Hardwork108]

and there was me thinking that wing chun has no 'blocks'

Your thinking is correct when it comes to higher levels of WC (and other styles as well).

I believe that blocking is sometimes necessary and that is why we are taught the blocks. The bil sao as taught to me, is a block that intercepts the elbow joint of the incoming hooking arm absorbing the force and feeding the turning "da".

Of course, as skill level improves and one gains mastery of the art and a better understanding of the principles then of course many blocks "lose" their initial importance.


a baseball bat couldn't be swung in the first place if you was in close enough -

You are right. Staying out of range until an opportunity arises sounds like sparring but is very un kung fu like (in many styles).


i'm not sure if i understand that argument in a realistic sense

I don´t think that it is a realistic approach as far as kung fu training is concerned. Having said that if one lacks the skills then perhaps one should stay out of range (meaning in many cases, go back), but that should not be the final aim of any kung fu training. In Wing Chun, one should aim to perfect the moving in and jamming/drowning of the assailant rather than moving back and contributing to his attacker`s momentum.:)

[Edmund]

This is complete nonsense, which I find surprising from you.

Sure, if he's a total moron he's just going to be swinging haymakers... but we're not talking about fighting haymakers, but hooks, which in case you hadn't noticed often come with a set up involving at least a couple of straight punches. And that's not even taking into consideration the likelihood of a clash of arms when you meet his guard.


I don't think so. Every setup is not via punches. An opponent can start with a hook in response to seeing an opening or creating an angle - especially when you're moving forward. It's to their advantage to move off at an angle whenever you move forward really. From that close position they don't need to set up with straight punches.

[Hardwork108]

I don't think so. Every setup is not via punches. An opponent can start with a hook in response to seeing an opening or creating an angle - especially when you're moving forward. It's to their advantage to move off at an angle whenever you move forward really. From that close position they don't need to set up with straight punches.

Good points.

Mr Punch. Again the object of the thread at least for the most part is to see what it is that works for you as far as blocking in concerned when you are in a situation where you HAVE to block a powerful hook.

I think that we all appreciate that a few jabs can precede a hook or a kick or even a headbutt but that is a question for another thread.:)

[Hardwork108]

Is this thread about a "tight" hook or a round punch? Some people call a round punch a "hook". There is a big difference.

Sorry I missed this.

The main object of the thread is to discuss how the Wing Chun people here would handle a powerful hook without compromising their structure.

So the object is not to discuss how to block a tight hook as my concern is how to handle/control a powerful hook, wether it is telegraphed or not. Look at this as a technical scenario primarily and not a fighting scenario.

I have seen some WC people bounce off and "swept" away when practicing against powerfull hooks coming from powerful training partners who know how to throw a hook.

For example, I personally find that tan sao collapses when the opponent is bigger and is of a strong built. How do you deal with a power hook?

[Mr Punch]

The opponent is throwing hooks. If you're throwing straight punches and not worrying about blocking, the punching paths aren't going to meet up.


I don't think so. Every setup is not via punches. An opponent can start with a hook in response to seeing an opening or creating an angle - especially when you're moving forward. It's to their advantage to move off at an angle whenever you move forward really. From that close position they don't need to set up with straight punches.

You are seriously suggesting that you could get a fight where one guy is coming in with only circular punches and the valiant chunner is using only straight punches and their arms never clash?! That is insane? If not, what exactly are you talking about, especially the bolded bit...?

[Mr Punch]

Good points. Er no. Regardless of what set up is being used, you forget I was taking issue with his statement that there's going to be no clash of hands.


Mr Punch. Again the object of the thread at least for the most part is to see what it is that works for you as far as blocking in concerned when you are in a situation where you HAVE to block a powerful hook.Well, that question has already been answered several times. It may just be that the thread's emphasis has changed due to...


I think that we all appreciate that a few jabs can precede a hook or a kick or even a headbutt but that is a question for another thread.:)...a fundamental lack of realism or practicality in it. Now you are saying that the set up to the hook is irrelevant? You're saying, how would you deal with a lone hook coming out of nowhere?

This is getting farcical...

Though thanks to Phil for injecting new sense into the thread with a good answer.

[Edmund]

You are seriously suggesting that you could get a fight where one guy is coming in with only circular punches and the valiant chunner is using only straight punches and their arms never clash?! That is insane? If not, what exactly are you talking about, especially the bolded bit...?

No.

mik3 said in the context of hooks you shouldn't worry about blocking an opponent's punches. Play your own game and just worry about hitting him etc. Supposedly defence is just going to take care of itself due to the awesomeness of your attack.

I just pointed out that your opponent is trying to hit you just as much. It doesn't even matter what the hell they are throwing - hook or straight. You're both hitting at each other. You CAN'T assume the arms are going to clash every time (hence defending you). The guy's got TWO hands for starters! You clashing with both of them? Also you can't assume particular combos are coming with straights setting up hooks. That's not realistic.

Realistically:
You are hitting at the guy. He will be trying to hit you back. He can throw anything. Defence won't always take care of itself. Sometimes you have to defend, other times attack.

[m1k3]

mik3 said in the context of hooks you shouldn't worry about blocking an opponent's punches. Play your own game and just worry about hitting him etc. Supposedly defence is just going to take care of itself due to the awesomeness of your attack.



That is almost, but not exactly, completely different from what I said.

My initial response was to punch AND cover using a pak sau with the opposite hand. Something I remember being taught about using both hands at the same time. You might hit him hard enough to reduce the threat of the hook and even if you don't the cover(pak) should absorb most of the force if you eat the hook. (NEW COMMENT BEGINS HERE) If you use a little boxing with your chun you could also raise the shoulder with the punch while hunching the head down to let the shoulder deflect some of the blow.

Later, people interpreted my response as "I don't need no stinking defense".

Then I said if you focus on defense you end up not playing your game but reacting to his (chasing hands). This is a losing proposition no matter what your style.

To me the tone of this thread has become what can I do to avoid being hit. For most part the answer is "you can't".

As Sugar Ray Leonard said "All boxers get hit, good boxers get hit less often". I believe this to be try for practitioners of Chinese Boxing as well.

You can't block every punch but you can use good structure to mitigate the impact and preemptive punching to reduce the number of shots being thrown at you. But if your opponent has any skills at all you are going to be tagged. :eek: It is unrealistic to believe you can fight/spar without getting hit.

You could do a whole 'nother thread on how to train for that, but we don't need to go there now.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Realistically:
You are hitting at the guy. He will be trying to hit you back. He can throw anything. Defence won't always take care of itself. Sometimes you have to defend, other times attack.

The person who's strikes hit home the hardest will compromise that others structure making their "attack" ineffective, even if, as it typically does in real fights, hits home.
Being on an angle where you can hit and NOT get hit helps a tad too.
;)

[CFT]

My initial response was to punch AND cover using a pak sau with the opposite hand. Something I remember being taught about using both hands at the same time. You might hit him hard enough to reduce the threat of the hook and even if you don't the cover(pak) should absorb most of the force if you eat the hook.Do you pak over the crook of the elbow of the punching hand? I honestly can't see that eating much if any of the power of a hook. What part of the hook arm is your pak connecting with?

[m1k3]

Do you pak over the crook of the elbow of the punching hand? I honestly can't see that eating much if any of the power of a hook. What part of the hook arm is your pak connecting with?

Actually the pak is a last defense cover. I am not paking the attacking arm but taking up space to defuse the incoming strike. The punch thrown with the hand on the same side as his hook.

As sanjuro_ronin said in the previous post:
The person who's strikes hit home the hardest will compromise that others structure making their "attack" ineffective, even if, as it typically does in real fights, hits home.

This says it better than I did. Although I would include hits home first as well as hardest. It doesn't always take a lot of force to disrupt the structure of a body in motion.

[CFT]

Actually the pak is a last defense cover. I am not paking the attacking arm but taking up space to defuse the incoming strike. The punch thrown with the hand on the same side as his hook.Sorry, I still can't picture what your pak is actually doing. If the incoming hook is on your left, what is your right pak doing, what space is it occupying? How does that diffuse the force of the punch if it doesn't make contact with anything?

[m1k3]

OK, how about this,

He is throwing a hook with his left hand.

I throw a straight punch with my right, the same side as his hook.

At the same time I bring a pak sau with my left hand up past my right check/ear, about 2 or 3 inches from my face. Think SLT pak - punch.

The pak is just hanging there as the punch is being thrown. It is a cover not a block, it isn't looking to contact the incoming hook. If the punch is successful the incoming punch either won't land or will make minimum contact with the pak, instead of your face. If the punch is unsuccessful then the pak will absorb the full impact of the hook. Unfortunately your face will absorb a lot of that impact also but the pak will reduce the strength of the blow.

[CFT]

The pak is just hanging there as the punch is being thrown. It is a cover not a block, it isn't looking to contact the incoming hook. If the punch is successful the incoming punch either won't land or will make minimum contact with the pak, instead of your face. If the punch is unsuccessful then the pak will absorb the full impact of the hook. Unfortunately your face will absorb a lot of that impact also but the pak will reduce the strength of the blow.Ah yes I see now. Has it worked for you? Surely the danger is that if the hook is strong enough the pak doesn't really do anything? Why not cover on the same side and punch with the other arm?

[Mr Punch]

You can move with it, but also I've used the pak like that flush to the head, so the head actually augments the 'block'. It's not great, and it isn't going to stop it, but it helps you take some of the sting out of it, and protects your temple/jaw/ear from the worst.

But like he m1k3 says, and T said before, the best bet is to keep moving, keep the pressure up, and use some covering move to narrow his options. If you think of blocking you're playing a reactive game which is too slow against a serious striker going at full speed, not to mention impossible (I agree with Phil: anyone who says they can block a tight hook on the inside... or most hooks is kidding themselves). Providing limited target options through aggression, movement and covering various gates will help you more.

[Mr Punch]

If you use a little boxing with your chun you could also raise the shoulder with the punch while hunching the head down to let the shoulder deflect some of the blow.Not necessarily boxing. I can almost here the wave of derision as a type this, but in wing chun, hey, you can actually break the 'rule' of keeping your head pulled up to the heavens... In Biu Jee you roll your elbow over for the kaap jarn: as an extension of this let your shoulder roll over for cover. That's what it's for.

This is why I said earlier that while not ideal, the bong is also an acceptable cover. Lo Man Kam's SLT bong covers the ear, and the extended kaap jarn in Biu Jee is perfect for the same, plus at that range your elbow is perfect for dropping down onto his face as a continuation of the deflection.

[m1k3]

Ah yes I see now. Has it worked for you? Surely the danger is that if the hook is strong enough the pak doesn't really do anything? Why not cover on the same side and punch with the other arm?

Usually hooks are felt before they are seen.

This works with varying degrees of success depending on your training partner and yes I have used it with varying degrees of success.

In almost all cases when I used this it was because at some time in the past I ate a hook when I threw a right and left my chin exposed. So I do this as preventive medicine when throwing the right against someone I know who likes to counter with a left hook to the head.

Of course you are leaving your ribs and liver exposed to a left hook to the body.:eek:

This is a big part of the reason I switched to grappling as my preferred method of self abuse. :D I'm just too pretty to get hit.

Although I have found that some of my chun has translated well into clinch grappling skills and I still work the first third of SLT for that reason.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Usually hooks are felt before they are seen.

This works with varying degrees of success depending on your training partner and yes I have used it with varying degrees of success.

In almost all cases when I used this it was because at some time in the past I ate a hook when I threw a right and left my chin exposed. So I do this as preventive medicine when throwing the right against someone I know who likes to counter with a left hook to the head.

Of course you are leaving your ribs and liver exposed to a left hook to the body.:eek:

This is a big part of the reason I switched to grappling as my preferred method of self abuse. :D I'm just too pretty to get hit.

Although I have found that some of my chun has translated well into clinch grappling skills and I still work the first third of SLT for that reason.

Hooks and uppercuts are, by the very nature, "hard" to see and easy to feel.
They are also, typically, "counter" strikes.

[CFT]

Thanks for the replies m1k3.

[Edmund]

That is almost, but not exactly, completely different from what I said.

My initial response was to punch AND cover using a pak sau with the opposite hand. Something I remember being taught about using both hands at the same time. You might hit him hard enough to reduce the threat of the hook and even if you don't the cover(pak) should absorb most of the force if you eat the hook.


You're trying to throw a right punch while covering the right side of your head assuming what side he's going to attack. What's covering the left side of your head?


Then I said if you focus on defense you end up not playing your game but reacting to his (chasing hands). This is a losing proposition no matter what your style.

I said a couple of times that sometimes you defend and sometimes attack. WC has attacks and OF COURSE it would be good to hurt the opponent so bad he can't attack. But sometimes you have to defend.

Attacking all the time is just as unrealistic as defending all the time.



You can't block every punch but you can use good structure to mitigate the impact and preemptive punching to reduce the number of shots being thrown at you. But if your opponent has any skills at all you are going to be tagged. :eek: It is unrealistic to believe you can fight/spar without getting hit.


I don't believe that you can't get hit but I still defend stuff.

Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?

[bawang]

weng chun does not have good defence against powerful hooks because wing chun is a small isolated style created in a small isolated city with little outer contact, with the original focus mainly on weapons in the first place, i dont do wing chun anymore
only way is to punch the guy before he punches you because wing chun rely on speed, striaght punch more distance then hook, and circular punch opens your centerline
if the guy throws combination hooks dont freeze and turtle up step back
other than that is hak yi a common southern block , but is not in wing chun, its the same as the western boxing ear guard


Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?
wing chun

[Sihing73]

weng chun does not have good defence against powerful hooks because wing chun is a small isolated style created in a small isolated city with little outer contact, with the original focus mainly on weapons in the first place, i dont do wing chun anymore
only way is to punch the guy before he punches you because wing chun rely on speed, striaght punch more distance then hook, and circular punch opens your centerline
if the guy throws combination hooks dont freeze and turtle up step back
other than that is hak yi a common southern block , but is not in wing chun, its the same as the western boxing ear guard

wing chun

Hello,

Sorry to interject but WC does have hooks found withing the third form, heack you could even use the lan sau turn in the second from to expound into hooks. These are short hooks close to the body. So, to think that a system which teaches and incorporates hooks would not be familiar with them because they developed in a "small city" is uninformed. BTW, what "small city" developed Wing Chun?

One of the things which I have found useful in incorporating into my WC is the FMA idea or concept of destructions. A hook is or can be a powerful weapon, but depending on ones drive and focus it is not unbeatable.

Sometimes we tend to become set in our ways and forget that one of the things which makes WC so effective is our fluidity, our ability to change from one "technique" to another. Often, IMHO, the reason something does not work is that one keeps trying to apply a method which failed without having the foresight to change in flux with the situation.

If one uses the Taun\Biu along with a strike to the opponents shoulder and stops there then one deserves to be hit. If however one continues on with additional strikes or uses a destruction to the arm as well then one may find things working out a bit better.

Of course one must also be mentally and physically prepared to be hit and continue through any pain which comes with being hit. IMHO, ones mental focus is the most important element in a fight. Although having said that ones must be physically able to perform in ones chosen art as well. One without the other is just as bad as neither at all.

Just my opinion based on many comic books and tv shows and the occasional MA movie, because we know only a few here have any "real" street experience. ;)

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=bawang;907200]weng chun does not have good defence against powerful hooks because wing chun is a small isolated style created in a small isolated city with little outer contact, with the original focus mainly on weapons in the first place, i dont do wing chun anymore
only way is to punch the guy before he punches you because wing chun rely on speed, striaght punch more distance then hook, and circular punch opens your centerline
if the guy throws combination hooks dont freeze and turtle up step back
other than that is hak yi a common southern block , but is not in wing chun, its the same as the western boxing ear guard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonsense. Some folks who apparently havent done much wingchun are jabbering away with some negative comments on wing chun-the style itself..that is why I broke my own rule and responded.
You shoudn't underestimate any one- including a hooker. If you have done enough wing chun
and developed good timing(s)(many kinds not just speed)), good yet dynamic structure and motion, distance and position you can simultaneously attack and defend against a hook with spontaneous uses from a great aresenal of hand motions(not static shapes)- with the right angle and line- kau, jut, biu, wu,fak, fuk, lan, inside lop etc while simultaneously striking with kuen-various kinds,bridge,-lan palm, elbow and others.Of course that requires good wing chun training.
Wing chun can do its own hooks if needed using wing chun structure-not western boxing.
Hooks can be dangerous indeed for badly trained folks in any style- but if you are afraid of hooks you can always do chen man ching taichi forms or some other thing and just jabber about wing chun just to make noise.
I am commenting on my style and not individuals basically..

joy chaudhuri

[Hardwork108]

Er no. Regardless of what set up is being used, you forget I was taking issue with his statement that there's going to be no clash of hands.
Sorry, I missed the context of his answer as regards your "clashing hands" point. However, I still think that he made good points regarding the "set up" issue.


Well, that question has already been answered several times. It may just be that the thread's emphasis has changed due to...
I thought that there would be more than the few answers that I have seen here. I thought that some people would expand on this subject further. Of course, I do understand that threads tend to evolve.


fundamental lack of realism or practicality in it. Now you are saying that the set up to the hook is irrelevant?

Maybe you misunderstand (and maybe on purpose?). I am not saying that the set up is irrelevant I am saying that this thread deals with the situation when you have to block a powerful hook - an instant of time in a fighting situation. That is all! but again I understand that threads change. I just wanted to see if anyone would enrich it further technically.:)


You're saying, how would you deal with a lone hook coming out of nowhere?

Actually I believe that 100s of people around the planet get knocked out every day by hooks that "come out of nowhere".;)

The thread is about a hypophetical instant in fighting when you have to use a WC block against powerful hook.

I am hoping for more approaches regarding manners in which a WC practitioner can do that WITHOUT compromising his structure. However, if all the WC techniques have been "exhausted" then let the thread EVOLVE!:)



This is getting farcical...

Not really, but then a sense of humor is not a forte around these forums.:D

[bawang]

hi mister chaudhuri, plz do not to take ofence, i said what i believe to be the truth,
what u sed is block and counter punch, which works okey against single hooks but
if you spar against good boxer, what you say doesnt work against combination hooks one after another, espesically when the other guy is moving and shifting positions also, and with weng chun blocks hook punch slips through

i think you guys do not understands sifuu chow and sifu charuri, why u assume i no have experence, i fighted many peoples, maybe compare to u guys i am not good ,i always had problems with defending hooks with weng chun, thats why i posted because i remember it very much, i am soory i never talk a bout things i dont kno, but this time i know in what i say

it is easy to break the weng chun blocks with northern swing punch the punch goes right through the block this is calle "breaking the door" po mun

[Hardwork108]

Hello,

Sorry to interject but WC does have hooks found withing the third form, heack you could even use the lan sau turn in the second from to expound into hooks. These are short hooks close to the body. So, to think that a system which teaches and incorporates hooks would not be familiar with them because they developed in a "small city" is uninformed. BTW, what "small city" developed Wing Chun?

One of the things which I have found useful in incorporating into my WC is the FMA idea or concept of destructions. A hook is or can be a powerful weapon, but depending on ones drive and focus it is not unbeatable.

Sometimes we tend to become set in our ways and forget that one of the things which makes WC so effective is our fluidity, our ability to change from one "technique" to another. Often, IMHO, the reason something does not work is that one keeps trying to apply a method which failed without having the foresight to change in flux with the situation.

If one uses the Taun\Biu along with a strike to the opponents shoulder and stops there then one deserves to be hit. If however one continues on with additional strikes or uses a destruction to the arm as well then one may find things working out a bit better.

Of course one must also be mentally and physically prepared to be hit and continue through any pain which comes with being hit. IMHO, ones mental focus is the most important element in a fight. Although having said that ones must be physically able to perform in ones chosen art as well. One without the other is just as bad as neither at all.

Just my opinion based on many comic books and tv shows and the occasional MA movie, because we know only a few here have any "real" street experience. ;)

Thank you. What you describe there is very similar to the approach and the way I have been trained: Solid training in the rich variety of techniques, incorporating an understanding of Wing Chun principles and combined with fluidity, flow and intention! :)

[Hardwork108]

[QUOTE=bawang;907200]weng chun does not have good defence against powerful hooks because wing chun is a small isolated style created in a small isolated city with little outer contact, with the original focus mainly on weapons in the first place, i dont do wing chun anymore
only way is to punch the guy before he punches you because wing chun rely on speed, striaght punch more distance then hook, and circular punch opens your centerline
if the guy throws combination hooks dont freeze and turtle up step back
other than that is hak yi a common southern block , but is not in wing chun, its the same as the western boxing ear guard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonsense. Some folks who apparently havent done much wingchun are jabbering away with some negative comments on wing chun-the style itself..that is why I broke my own rule and responded.
You shoudn't underestimate any one- including a hooker. If you have done enough wing chun
and developed good timing(s)(many kinds not just speed)), good yet dynamic structure and motion, distance and position you can simultaneously attack and defend against a hook with spontaneous uses from a great aresenal of hand motions(not static shapes)- with the right angle and line- kau, jut, biu, wu,fak, fuk, lan, inside lop etc while simultaneously striking with kuen-various kinds,bridge,-lan palm, elbow and others.Of course that requires good wing chun training.
Wing chun can do its own hooks if needed using wing chun structure-not western boxing.
Hooks can be dangerous indeed for badly trained folks in any style- but if you are afraid of hooks you can always do chen man ching taichi forms or some other thing and just jabber about wing chun just to make noise.
I am commenting on my style and not individuals basically..

joy chaudhuri

Thank you as well sifu chaudhuri. I believe that people such as yourself should post more often in these threads. Perhaps if you do post more often then the people with the lesser experience in Wing Chun will have less excuse to post negative comments (unfortunately it probably doesn´t mean that they won´t) about this art, and others such as myself who are Wing Chuners, can develop and enrich our knowledge.

Thanks again. :)

[couch]

other than that is hak yi a common southern block , but is not in wing chun, its the same as the western boxing ear guard

wing chun

Breaking my New Year's Resolution of not posting, LOL. Oh well. Have to clear something up here.

If I raise my left hand and elbow up to protect the left part of my face from a right hook, it IS Wing Chun. It's in the forms as a raising hand and elbow technique.

In sparring, I have also successfully moved my head away(to the right) and placed a right Pak Sau by the left side of my face while striking straight with my left hand. This is right out of the dummy form except in the dummy form the strike is done low.

For me, it's the 'reprogramming' that I like about the forms. If I practice with the right structure and emphasis (elbow, stance, facing), it all comes out naturally in the Chi Sau and therefore the sparring.

Works for me and I'm happy,
Kenton

[m1k3]

You're trying to throw a right punch while covering the right side of your head assuming what side he's going to attack. What's covering the left side of your head?



I said a couple of times that sometimes you defend and sometimes attack. WC has attacks and OF COURSE it would be good to hurt the opponent so bad he can't attack. But sometimes you have to defend.

Attacking all the time is just as unrealistic as defending all the time.



I don't believe that you can't get hit but I still defend stuff.

Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?

I think we may be closer in opinion than you realize.

I feel you are taking what I am saying as an absolute and that this is the only way to deal with a hook. I am trying to say that this is ONE way to use your WC when dealing with someone who likes to throw hooks.

As I said in another post I have used this approach with varying degrees of success usually when I am sparring with someone I that I know likes to try the left hook as a counter to a right hand punch.

I am not advocating attacking all the time and I agree that the opportunity for hurting the opponent so bad he can't attack does not present itself as often as we would hope. To go hunting for KOs is as bad of a trap as chasing hands.

But, it is possible to use the punch in a defensive manner, to intercept (jeet?), disrupt his structure and range and take away his timing. There is a boxing saying that your best defense is a good jab. There are also several boxing sayings that say your best defense is good footwork, good conditioning or good head movement. So, I get to cherry pick my defense saying. :D

For your final question: "Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?"

The answer is a good boxer and this includes Chinese Boxing also.

As I have gotten older (55 currently) I have taken to heart a saying by Helio Gracie, "I don't fight to win, I fight not to lose." This works well when rolling or working your striking game. I have found that punches with the intent to annoy rather than damage work well as a defense and if you get the chance to land a hard shot or combination take the gift and say thank you.

[Vajramusti]

Hi Bawang-Nothing personal-promise. I can understand your own failure in stopping hooks with what you learned. Good hooks are dangerous things. What I object to- is not the uncommon induction problem of pontificating on all of wing chun based on one's limited or episodic exposure to wing chun.

Thanks Hardwork-I really have given up on short internet discussion bites but some old habits return on occasion..though daily wing chun continues-and it's not my rice bowl.

Sihing 73- points well taken, except I have not needed FMA.Sticking with wc continues to give additional insights much of the time.Good BJD and kwan work further extends capabilities. FWIW/BTW- I have found first rate Gurkha knife work in a league of its own compared to FMA-
but no sense to add sound/word bites on that in this context.You are correct- On the net folks sometimes assume a lot about who knows what and who has had what experience, including the oft repeated phrase:"against resisting opponents".

joy chaudhuri

[Wayfaring]

One other key concept that relates to dealing with hooks with your WC that has completely been sidestepped on this thread is space.

Where does a hook that can inflict damage on you originate from? Inside or outside your own space?

If you control your space and distance to your opponent then all a hook is is someone in your space without a bridge. Or outside of your space punching air.

If you can't control your space and distance to an opponent and they crash your space, that's where strikes from multiple angles are the most dangerous. WC certainly has recovery techniques for this problem. Do people ever get in this dilemma? Oh, certainly not any on this thread. Perfect space and distance control. ;)

Actually the more skilled and conditioned your opponent is, the more difficult it is to control space / distance. Good boxers develop a knack for hanging right around your "go" point, moving in and out, trying to draw you into their space. And if you're tired at the end of a 5 min round and they are not, your ability to control space / distance decreases.

The fighting hands of WC have plenty of solutions to sweeping space, sinking bridges, attacking center, and even recovering lost space.

But the issue really is not in the hands. :D

[Edmund]

I feel you are taking what I am saying as an absolute and that this is the only way to deal with a hook. I am trying to say that this is ONE way to use your WC when dealing with someone who likes to throw hooks.


Then what would be your other ways? I believe HW was asking something along those lines.



But, it is possible to use the punch in a defensive manner, to intercept (jeet?), disrupt his structure and range and take away his timing. There is a boxing saying that your best defense is a good jab. There are also several boxing sayings that say your best defense is good footwork, good conditioning or good head movement. So, I get to cherry pick my defense saying. :D

For your final question: "Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?"

The answer is a good boxer and this includes Chinese Boxing also.


I don't agree on that one. It's not a realistic goal.

[Phil Redmond]

Here is a clip I threw together regarding a round punch. I left some things out that I can explain later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBxo-mUz3EA

[m1k3]

Then what would be your other ways? I believe HW was asking something along those lines.



I don't agree on that one. It's not a realistic goal.

I don't think he asked for every defense for every type of hook. There is more than one type of hook you know.

As for you don't agree and it's not realistic are you talking about using a punch in
a defensive manner, to intercept (jeet?), disrupt his structure and range and take away his timing.

or for


For your final question: "Who spars attacking all of the time and preempting everything the opponent's got, never worrying about defending?"

The answer is a good boxer and this includes Chinese Boxing also.

My answer to both of these is watch a boxing match either with a good boxer who has a good jab. Ali, Sugar Ray (either of them), Sonny Liston or Larry Holmes. The jab is always there. Or a good infighter: Joe Frazier, Rocky Marciano or a young Mike Tyson. Fighters who control their opponent by swarming aggression, close distance and vicious body punches. Two totally different ways of using the attack to provide defense.

[Mr Punch]

Before this thread gets any more irrelevant:

look here! (http://martial.best.vwh.net/forum/showthread.php?t=52984)

[Wayfaring]

Let’s stop it right now!
Ali Rahim.

Hey Ali,

I've seen clips you have up where you're training young boxers, doing a lot of focus pad work with movement.

What's your opinion on dealing with a boxer's hook with wing chun structures?

[Wayfaring]

Here is a clip I threw together regarding a round punch. I left some things out that I can explain later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBxo-mUz3EA

Phil,

That link says "video unavailable". Do you have it marked private or something?

[mjw]

Against a hook I would use a dip/bill sau (spelling may be off) and if the hook is that powerful that it starts to break through I would simply follow wing chun princilples from chi sau training and just do a second dip/bill sau under or to the otherside of the hook and shift to the outside of the hook thus letting that hook continue on it's path and then sieze the elbow and break the structure of my opponent or take what is open.

[Edmund]

As for you don't agree and it's not realistic are you talking about using a punch in
a defensive manner



I'm in agreement you can use a punch in a defensive manner to disrupt the opponent's offence.





My answer to both of these is watch a boxing match either with a good boxer who has a good jab. Ali, Sugar Ray (either of them), Sonny Liston or Larry Holmes. The jab is always there. Or a good infighter: Joe Frazier, Rocky Marciano or a young Mike Tyson. Fighters who control their opponent by swarming aggression, close distance and vicious body punches. Two totally different ways of using the attack to provide defense.

They defend by blocking and moving off as well! They don't attack all the time AND no one can preempt everything the opponent is about to do.

That's the whole point. You can't be completely attack.
A good fighter can attack AND defend.

[Phil Redmond]

Sorry about that. Here's the correct link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LMm3hYad0
This clip was done after coming from Warrington Hudlin's Inauguration party in Tribeca so I left some things out. ;). I will make a more detailed clip this weekend. Though there might be people who disagree I must say that I do what has saved my a** in real fights and in the ring. Of course I'll change my methods when I find something that works better for me and my students.

[TenTigers]

I like that, it looks like it's operating almost like a shoulder stop, breaking his structure.

[Violent Designs]

Sorry about that. Here's the correct link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LMm3hYad0
This clip was done after coming from Warrington Hudlin's Inauguration party in Tribeca so I left some things out. ;). I will make a more detailed clip this weekend. Though there might be people who disagree I must say that I do what has saved my a** in real fights and in the ring. Of course I'll change my methods when I find something that works better for me and my students.

Good post Sifu Redmond shows what you NEED to do not just theory. A lot of WC players think using that technique after a sau/kup/deng choy or a powerful hook has already started traveling in the arc at full speed will still stop it which is stupid and silly.

You gotta stop it at conception.

[Hardwork108]

You gotta stop it at conception.
At conception or at least early on in its trajectory. What to do when a powerful hook is at full swing would also make a good discussion.

Regarding sifu Redmonds video clip. The way I was taught to handle the exact situation was to block bill sao to elbow joint but instead of moving to the opponent`s right, I would step with my right foot to his left at a 45 degree angle delivering an instant right hand strike to the neck/face area while "borrowing" the force from his hook, followed by multiple strikes until the threat was diminished.

I suppose that it is a case of different strokes.:)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sorry about that. Here's the correct link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LMm3hYad0
This clip was done after coming from Warrington Hudlin's Inauguration party in Tribeca so I left some things out. ;). I will make a more detailed clip this weekend. Though there might be people who disagree I must say that I do what has saved my a** in real fights and in the ring. Of course I'll change my methods when I find something that works better for me and my students.

The only critique I have is that a good boxer ( average) would not attack with a hook like that.

[m1k3]

I'm in agreement you can use a punch in a defensive manner to disrupt the opponent's offence.

Ok, this is a good start to the day.:D




They defend by blocking and moving off as well! They don't attack all the time AND no one can preempt everything the opponent is about to do.

That's the whole point. You can't be completely attack.
A good fighter can attack AND defend.

And to reciprocate, I agree with this. :eek:

I was just trying to make the point that a punch can be defensive as well as offensive.

[Wayfaring]

Sorry about that. Here's the correct link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LMm3hYad0
This clip was done after coming from Warrington Hudlin's Inauguration party in Tribeca so I left some things out. ;). I will make a more detailed clip this weekend. Though there might be people who disagree I must say that I do what has saved my a** in real fights and in the ring. Of course I'll change my methods when I find something that works better for me and my students.


Yes. It is your flanking step and the control of space with structure that is the key here. Not just the hand technique.

Now it is a little more difficult to do that off of a standard combination, like the boxer jabbing his way into your space (LH jab), then a straight RH, then the hook. But the concepts are the same.

Thx for the video.

[Mr Punch]

Regarding Phil's vid: yeah, that'll work against a lone hook-thrower. You assume that a) it's easy enough to read the hook coming and b) the hooker doesn't know to set it up properly and c) you're faster than the hooker.

A more pertinent question at this stage is what do you do about say, a jab-hook, or a jab-cross-hook... but since HW has already stated this question only relates to one hook, I don't suppose we can play any more 'what if' games... :rolleyes:

BTW, mjw, welcome to the board: you're going to get KTFO the first time you train with a boxer. :D

[m1k3]

The only critique I have is that a good boxer ( average) would not attack with a hook like that.

You might if the lead hook to the head was just a set up for a follow-up hook to the body. People who double hook should be shot on sight.

[Mr Punch]

People who double hook should be shot on sight.LOL, now that's a good defence!

[Hardwork108]

A more pertinent question at this stage is what do you do about say, a jab-hook, or a jab-cross-hook... but since HW has already stated this question only relates to one hook, I don't suppose we can play any more 'what if' games... :rolleyes:

My reason for saying that is based on the fact that if your block and structure collapse from one powerful hook it makes what you did before that hook came at you irrelevant. Of course if people have ran out of ideas about this single defense then by all means they can evolve this thread.:)

[Phil Redmond]

The only critique I have is that a good boxer ( average) would not attack with a hook like that.
Some good boxers do. We have boxers at our school including a pro.

[Phil Redmond]

Regarding Phil's vid: yeah, that'll work against a lone hook-thrower. You assume that a) it's easy enough to read the hook coming and b) the hooker doesn't know to set it up properly and c) you're faster than the hooker.

A more pertinent question at this stage is what do you do about say, a jab-hook, or a jab-cross-hook... but since HW has already stated this question only relates to one hook, I don't suppose we can play any more 'what if' games... :rolleyes:

BTW, mjw, welcome to the board: you're going to get KTFO the first time you train with a boxer. :D
My specialty is what if's. I teach how to deal with combos as well.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Some good boxers do. We have boxers at our school including a pro.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.
You aren't taught to do it, you are reamed if you do and typically if you are gonna lead with a hook, you don't do it like that.
But...

[Hardwork108]

You might if the lead hook to the head was just a set up for a follow-up hook to the body.

Maybe the rather overlooked area of kung fu training known as "sticking" would come handy in a situation like this.



People who double hook should be shot on sight.

Or maybe you can try the instant block/hit I described in a previous post?;)

[Phil Redmond]

I will give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.
You aren't taught to do it, you are reamed if you do and typically if you are gonna lead with a hook, you don't do it like that.
But...
That was a static demo. I agree, there are better ways to set up a hook or round punch.

[sanjuro_ronin]

That was a static demo. There are better ways to set up a hook or round punch.

Kind of my point, don't take me the wrong way, your "counter" was well done and well applied, angles and all, just that, typically, I don't see it happening when a lead hook is thrown like it is suppose to...
Just too much happens before the hook is even thrown, know what I mean.
For demo purposes it was fine and the principle was correct though.

[JPinAZ]

Regarding sifu Redmonds video clip. The way I was taught to handle the exact situation was to block bill sao to elbow joint but instead of moving to the opponent`s right, I would step with my right foot to his left at a 45 degree angle delivering an instant right hand strike to the neck/face area while "borrowing" the force from his hook, followed by multiple strikes until the threat was diminished.

I suppose that it is a case of different strokes.:)

I think either reaction is ok and both are dependant on timing and strategy.
In Sifu Redmond's video, I see this as a good response as he has some time (distance) to set up, as well as takes an angle when engaging that puts him in a good position to both deal with the incoming hook as well as having more space to deal with the follow-up left.
Your given response could put you more in harms way for the follow up left. But, depending on the timing and range, it might be the only option. (ie, punch starts closer, not enough time for foot work or set up, you are squared up when punch is thrown, etc).

[Knifefighter]

Here is a clip I threw together regarding a round punch. I left some things out that I can explain later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBxo-mUz3EA

Makes no sense to me to extend out and block the inside upper arm/shoulder area. Assuming you can read the punch and extend out, you'd be better off to go directly to the face. You'll stop the hook and do damage at the same time... as well as disrupt the follow ups that would be coming after the hook if you simply stop it.

[Phil Redmond]

Makes no sense to me to extend out and block the inside upper arm/shoulder area. Assuming you can read the punch and extend out, you'd be better off to go directly to the face. You'll stop the hook and do damage at the same time... as well as disrupt the follow ups that would be coming after the hook if you simply stop it.
Though it might not make sense to you what's important to me is that it makes sense to me.

[Knifefighter]

Though it might not make sense to you what's important to me is that it makes sense to me.

Why do you hit that area instead of the face?

[Phil Redmond]

Why do you hit that area instead of the face?
No particular reason. I was more concerned with the round punch.

[Wayfaring]

Makes no sense to me to extend out and block the inside upper arm/shoulder area. Assuming you can read the punch and extend out, you'd be better off to go directly to the face. You'll stop the hook and do damage at the same time... as well as disrupt the follow ups that would be coming after the hook if you simply stop it.

On that angle from a WC perspective you have a straight RH to the face set up right there with nothing blocking, and you train that stuff to be either simultaneous block/hit, or in very quick succession like a 1-2. From that angle it's a power RH. Your opponent has a lot further to travel to hit you with his left hand when you're flanking him like that.

Yes, a lead hand LH jab to the face while flank stepping is another viable option, and you have a similar 1-2 option.

IMO it's harder to react to a hook and time beating it with a jab than it is step and sweep the space that the hook is coming into. Also, intercepting the arm like that puts you a little bit closer in range to your opponent, which sets up a little more power in the RH. It is a similar range that boxers have when they slip the lead hook to a flanking position and hit straight up the middle with the RH.

The other thing intercepting the arm can do if you're far enough ahead of the punch is bring in overhook options on that arm, which brings your elbows into play.

[mjw]

Regarding Phil's vid: yeah, that'll work against a lone hook-thrower. You assume that a) it's easy enough to read the hook coming and b) the hooker doesn't know to set it up properly and c) you're faster than the hooker.

A more pertinent question at this stage is what do you do about say, a jab-hook, or a jab-cross-hook... but since HW has already stated this question only relates to one hook, I don't suppose we can play any more 'what if' games... :rolleyes:

BTW, mjw, welcome to the board: you're going to get KTFO the first time you train with a boxer. :D


I'm not trying to make any enemies on here but I started what I know to work off a powerful hook that might throw one off ballance or break ones structure with WCK principles I don't think a trained boxer would put so much into one punch.

Anywho thanks and no offense taken.

Jab hooks and all these what ifs are a series of different questions in my opinion and some of the best ways to figure these out are by yes sparring boxers, tan-gan-dip or chi sau.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'm not trying to make any enemies on here but I started what I know to work off a powerful hook that might throw one off ballance or break ones structure with WCK principles I don't think a trained boxer would put so much into one punch.

Under the right circumstances...


Jab hooks and all these what ifs are a series of different questions in my opinion and some of the best ways to figure these out are by yes sparring boxers

End of thread.

[JPinAZ]

Makes no sense to me to extend out and block the inside upper arm/shoulder area. Assuming you can read the punch and extend out, you'd be better off to go directly to the face. You'll stop the hook and do damage at the same time... as well as disrupt the follow ups that would be coming after the hook if you simply stop it.

sounds like lucky fighting to me - Quickest/fastest wins. Might work, if you are a lot faster. But you're suggesting not even even attempting to stop the punch - what if he's faster? you get hit.. sounds dumb to me

[Knifefighter]

sounds like lucky fighting to me - Quickest/fastest wins. Might work, if you are a lot faster. But you're suggesting not even even attempting to stop the punch - what if he's faster? you get hit.. sounds dumb to me

If you can do what was shown in the vid and get to his shoulder, you can hit to the face.

[Phil Redmond]

Why do you hit that area instead of the face?
You can also hit to the neck, throat, solar plexus, etc. I'd just come from a party that night and didn't want to take a chance on hitting Rahsun in the face.
The target wasn't important as showing how to interrupt the round punch. It was just a demo against a predetermined punch. Now if the question had been about dealing with combos like jab hook, uppercut hook, jab cross or whatever the video would have covered those apps.

[Phil Redmond]

Makes no sense to me to extend out and block the inside upper arm/shoulder area. Assuming you can read the punch and extend out, you'd be better off to go directly to the face. You'll stop the hook and do damage at the same time... as well as disrupt the follow ups that would be coming after the hook if you simply stop it.
It wasn't the upper arm shoulder area. That would get me hit for sure. Looks like I'll have to make a clip explaining all the details.

[Matrix]

If you can do what was shown in the vid and get to his shoulder, you can hit to the face.I think Dale is correct here. But, that's just my opinion.

Bill

[Phil Redmond]

I think Dale is correct here. But, that's just my opinion.

Bill
Dale is very correct. You can hit to the face as well as other targets.

[Liddel]

If you can do what was shown in the vid and get to his shoulder, you can hit to the face.

IMO I would imagine lots of VT practitioners have this in mind given that its one of the main reasons VT relies on the use of the stright punch so much...

Every opponent is different though and IME ive had to figure out the right times to use each.

Some sparring partners have the ability to tourque more than my Fut Sao can handle. (Fut from CK before Tok Sau is one of my prefered habit actions, i find it solid and easy to trans to an elbow from there) and also some of them can hook around my Fut even when i use proper turning/angling...Thier stepping can nuetralise my turn..
Generally speaking though even my falied action has removed the KO power and you only recieve a sting...so mission accomplished in my mind, survive.

Sometimes you can get it so right but the other guy just does it better...thats fightin.

Others i have no problem using Fut or Bui Sau, but it only takes a little ding to the temple to realise which one is best to use LOL.

DREW

[SiFu108]

I would like to know what your preferences are as far as using WING CHUN techniques against powerful hooks that are strong enough to break your structure if you are unsuccessful.

Furthermore, I have seen comments in the past here in the forum about using bong with wu sao( double handed) against hooks. Who amongst you prefers to use this technique and why?

Trying to block a real hook swinging very fast at you can be very difficult, remember Boxers will throw a hook at you and then usually follow it up with either a jab or uppercut. A Wing Chun person first has to practice against those types of attacks in order to feel some what comfortable in using his wing chun on the street. Using wing chun against someone who can launch those types of attacks at you can be done but with the right type of techniques and with lots of consant drilling. some of the best teachers to learn from to help you with defending against hooks,uppercuts,jabs..etc are Allan Lee, Duncan Leung and Robert Chu. but that is just my opinion.

[Phil Redmond]

IMO I would imagine lots of VT practitioners have this in mind given that its one of the main reasons VT relies on the use of the stright punch so much...

Every opponent is different though and IME ive had to figure out the right times to use each.

Some sparring partners have the ability to tourque more than my Fut Sao can handle. (Fut from CK before Tok Sau is one of my prefered habit actions, i find it solid and easy to trans to an elbow from there) and also some of them can hook around my Fut even when i use proper turning/angling...Thier stepping can nuetralise my turn..
Generally speaking though even my falied action has removed the KO power and you only recieve a sting...so mission accomplished in my mind, survive.

Sometimes you can get it so right but the other guy just does it better...thats fightin.

Others i have no problem using Fut or Bui Sau, but it only takes a little ding to the temple to realise which one is best to use LOL.

DREW

This Kiwi has his sh*t together. There's a few sayings I remember hearing in the gym. I can't rememver them all but one I keep in mind is; Any good fighter can have his a** handed to him/her on any given day, but I like the phrase "Sometimes you can get it so right but the other guy just does it better...thats fightin" that you wrote. Instead of saying that one method is better than another people should be trying to improve the martial art of their choice . (WC specifically should adhere to that ideal).

PR

[Phil Redmond]

Sorry about that. Here's the correct link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LMm3hYad0
This clip was done after coming from Warrington Hudlin's Inauguration party in Tribeca so I left some things out. ;). I will make a more detailed clip this weekend. Though there might be people who disagree I must say that I do what has saved my a** in real fights and in the ring. Of course I'll change my methods when I find something that works better for me and my students.
Here's a little more from today's class in Chinatown to add to the mix.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLFWdM3qwfU&feature=channel_page
I'm available at 3747 Church Road in Mount Laurel, NJ week nights and at 77 Mulberry St. in NYC Chinatown from 3:30pm to 4:30pm every Saturday if anyone would like to watch and ask questions, attend a class, or just visit for Dim Sum in one of the really nice restaurants in New York's Chinatown please feel free to drop by. Sometimes it's better to see things done in person. ;)

[deejaye72]

that was great phil, i've never had anyone explain the central line theory that good before,interesting!

[Phil Redmond]

that was great phil, i've never had anyone explain the central line theory that good before,interesting!
Thx, I'll be putting more clips here;
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/wckcg/ In this group people have to post clips of them doing WC. I find it keeps the people who criticize others but don't post clips of themselves for critique away.

[Hardwork108]

Trying to block a real hook swinging very fast at you can be very difficult, remember Boxers will throw a hook at you and then usually follow it up with either a jab or uppercut. A Wing Chun person first has to practice against those types of attacks in order to feel some what comfortable in using his wing chun on the street. Using wing chun against someone who can launch those types of attacks at you can be done but with the right type of techniques and with lots of consant drilling. some of the best teachers to learn from to help you with defending against hooks,uppercuts,jabs..etc are Allan Lee, Duncan Leung and Robert Chu. but that is just my opinion.

Thanks SiFu108,

Are there any specific Wing Chun techniques that you personally find effective against a powerful hook?

[Phil Redmond]

Trying to block a real hook swinging very fast at you can be very difficult, remember Boxers will throw a hook at you and then usually follow it up with either a jab or uppercut. A Wing Chun person first has to practice against those types of attacks in order to feel some what comfortable in using his wing chun on the street. Using wing chun against someone who can launch those types of attacks at you can be done but with the right type of techniques and with lots of consant drilling. some of the best teachers to learn from to help you with defending against hooks,uppercuts,jabs..etc are Allan Lee, Duncan Leung and Robert Chu. but that is just my opinion.
Having studied with Duncan Leung and Allan Lee I'm going to add Sifu William Cheung to that mix. SiFu108, where in New Jersey are you. Our school is in Mt. Laurel, NJ and I have a Sat. class in NY Chinatown. You're welcome to stop by.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Thx, I'll be putting more clips here;
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/wckcg/ In this group people have to post clips of them doing WC. I find it keeps the people who criticize others but don't post clips of themselves for critique away.

Well, from that link:

YOU MUST INCLUDE YOUR FULL, REAL NAME and COMPLETE WING CHUN LINEAGE in your sign up.
EVERY MEMBER IS REQUIRED TO POST A CLIP OF THEMSELVES "DOING" WING CHUN.


Phil, that is probably one of the best conditions to put on any MA discussion forum.
Well done.

[Phil Redmond]

Well, from that link:

YOU MUST INCLUDE YOUR FULL, REAL NAME and COMPLETE WING CHUN LINEAGE in your sign up.
EVERY MEMBER IS REQUIRED TO POST A CLIP OF THEMSELVES "DOING" WING CHUN.


Phil, that is probably one of the best conditions to put on any MA discussion forum.
Well done.
Thx, There's no posturing there. Heck, I can still learn from others. It's a sharing environment to help each other develop what we do, Wing Chun.
People tend to be less apt to be negative or trash talk when they know people have seen what they do on video. It keeps the a holes out. . .lol

[Ultimatewingchun]

Been itching to post on this thread (aside from the one or two posts I did way back) - but wanted to post some video, even though I didn't have the where-with-all to do it. So I've been watching and reading from the sidelines.

But now I think I can change that.

One of my newest students is going to bring a video camera to class next Monday, and he'll not only film, but he'll post a vid or two on youtube about dealing with tight and powerful hooks.

It'll be different in some significant ways than what's been shown/discussed so far.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Thx, There's no posturing there. Heck, I can still learn from others. It's a sharing environment to help each other develop what we do, Wing Chun.
People tend to be less apt to be negative or trash talk when they know people have seen what they do on video. It keeps the a holes out. . .lol

Hey Phil, have you seen the Keysi guys version of dealing with hooks?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Been itching to post on this thread (aside from the one or two posts I did way back) - but wanted to post some video, even though I didn't have the where-with-all to do it. So I've been watching and reading from the sidelines.

But now I think I can change that.

One of my newest students is going to bring a video camera to class next Monday, and he'll not only film, but he'll post a vid or two on youtube about dealing with tight and powerful hooks.

It'll be different in some significant ways than what's been shown/discussed so far.

Will we be able to live after seeing you in all your glory ??
:D

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ouch!!! :)

[Wayfaring]

Been itching to post on this thread (aside from the one or two posts I did way back) - but wanted to post some video, even though I didn't have the where-with-all to do it. So I've been watching and reading from the sidelines.

But now I think I can change that.

One of my newest students is going to bring a video camera to class next Monday, and he'll not only film, but he'll post a vid or two on youtube about dealing with tight and powerful hooks.

It'll be different in some significant ways than what's been shown/discussed so far.

Looking forward to the practical applications stuff.

[Phil Redmond]

Hey Phil, have you seen the Keysi guys version of dealing with hooks?
Good stuff. It looks like some JHR.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Good stuff. It looks like some JHR.

JHR ??
I know that Keysi is based on JKD from Inosanto so SOME WC is in there.

[CFT]

JHR ??Jail House Rock. I think.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Jail House Rock. I think.

Ah yes, quite true, the elbow and shield work is almost identical.

[Phil Redmond]

JHR ??
I know that Keysi is based on JKD from Inosanto so SOME WC is in there.
JHR is Jailhouse Rock. It's a prison style like 52 Blocks, and Comstock, etc. It also involves using a razor blade spit from the mouth into the hand for slashing. It's very popular in NYC.

[Ali. R]

There’s really nothing special or hard when dealing with a hook shot (to the head), just as good wing chun dictates; face the attack with any block that you feel is necessary…

Most of the people here like to fight from across the room anyway; while they’re so busy running away one wouldn’t have to worry about a hook shot unless one run’s into one foolishly…

It takes a lot of movement to throw a hook (Boxing), at least I can see one coming, and I’m sure many others can also…

Now, if one attacks the attack with good eye sensitivity; and as a long time practitioner of wing chun one should be very comfortable with that close range of fighting, which it will take for one to throw such a punch or to defend one metaphysically or without thought…

And if not, their wing chun is less then resolved and incomplete, then one must hit the drawing board once again.


Ali Rahim.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1d1OyedoDE

[sanjuro_ronin]

Okay, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1d1OyedoDE

Hi Victor, nice clip.
Very similar to Phil's.
Personally I am not a big fan of going into the hook that way, but if you caa make it work, great.
One question, and I didn't have volume so I don't know if you addressed it, why not hit the guy with the (in this case) left hand rather than intercept his hook at his arm/shoulder?

[Ultimatewingchun]

I did go into it on the vid...


It's different from Phil's (I explain/demo this on the last part) in that the centerline turned towards his far shoulder (the way Phil did it) does not allow me to immediately hit him with my other hand with any serious penetration/force.

He therefore has the opportunity to continue his attack unimpeded because he's not getting hit by me or controlled by me sufficiently.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I did go into it on the vid...


It's different from Phil's (I explain/demo this on the last part) in that the centerline turned towards his far shoulder (the way Phil did it) does not allow me to immediately hit him with my other hand with any serious penetration/force.

He therefore has the opportunity to continue his attack unimpeded because he's not getting hit by me or controlled by me sufficiently.

Understood.
I don't see this working against a tight hook, but maybe against a wide hook.
I am not a fan of extending an arm to jam a hook, not saying it won't work, just that it seems to require very good timing...

[Knifefighter]

Somehow I doubt you are going to see that work in a real-time environment.

[kung fu fighter]

I did go into it on the vid...


It's different from Phil's (I explain/demo this on the last part) in that the centerline turned towards his far shoulder (the way Phil did it) does not allow me to immediately hit him with my other hand with any serious penetration/force.

He therefore has the opportunity to continue his attack unimpeded because he's not getting hit by me or controlled by me sufficiently.

Nice clip vic!

it would be nice to see some clips of you free sparring with TWC especially with the modifications you made by incorperating long range tactics. They would go well to explain your past write ups.

[Phil Redmond]

I did go into it on the vid...


It's different from Phil's (I explain/demo this on the last part) in that the centerline turned towards his far shoulder (the way Phil did it) does not allow me to immediately hit him with my other hand with any serious penetration/force.

He therefore has the opportunity to continue his attack unimpeded because he's not getting hit by me or controlled by me sufficiently.
One was a centerline lop and the other was a central line lop. They are different and I explained that in my clip.

[Phil Redmond]

Somehow I doubt you are going to see that work in a real-time environment.
We do it all the time in real time and not just in class. ;)

[Knifefighter]

We do it all the time in real time and not just in class. ;)

Maybe you could post a clip? I'd be interested to see either of the variations you guys have shown.

[Ultimatewingchun]

It works in real time, Dale...and yes, it works against tight hooks also, sanjuro...(the striking arm might elbow strike instead of punching when up against a very tight hook).

Granted, the timing and footwork might be slightly different in real time than what you saw on the vid - as well as the fact that other things might also come into play, ie.- he might follow the first (or his second) hook with an attempt to clinch or shoot, he might set up his hook differently than what was done in the vid, etc.

Plan on posting more vids about this in the future - including real time full contact fighting/sparring.

And yes, kung fu fighter...you've read my mind. Future clips will also include the longer range stuff I've been posting about.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Sanjuro,

As regards the timing and the extension of the arm being a possible "issue" - this is where another subject I've posted about many times comes into play: directly watching elbows and knees from the distance - and directy watching the elbow of the arm you're NOT contacting once contact has been made with his first strike.

You rely on contact reflexes (developed from chi sao drills) to tell you what he's doing with the arm you're presently engaging - freeing your eyes up to look at his non-contacted arm's elbow).

[hunt1]

It appears that both you and Phil are totally open to the cross the most surely is coming from a competent boxer. The other hand always comes. It seems that you are hoping to deal with the other hand by moving away from it. However in the examples shown the boxer could easily land a cross with a simple change of footwork/body facing.

[Knifefighter]

I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting to see the clips of these techs used in full contact settings.

[Ultimatewingchun]

On the contrary, hunt...one of the reasons why my non blocking arm is IMMEDIATELY being thrown into his shoulder (or his face) is to have it "in the game" in case he tries to rear cross (or hook) with his other arm. (I'm taking valuable real estate that he'd need to have in order to throw a punch with his rear arm).

"It seems that you are hoping to deal with the other hand by moving away from it. However in the examples shown the boxer could easily land a cross with a simple change of footwork/body facing." (hunt)


***PAY STRICT attention to the footwork used in this sequence - a prime example of TWC's blindside strategy...the fact that I'm moving in BUT to his outside brings me further away from his rear hand - thereby providing TIME to deal with his rear arm if it comes (ie.- cross, hook, uppercut, etc.)

I move in (but slightly to the outside of his lead leg) as he throws the punch...or as he tries to come into my space...or, as you'll see in future vids - I might just attack from long range and not wait for him at all.

Also, regarding the vid I put up: being on the outside of his lead leg actually makes it harder for him to turn and throw the cross with any serious speed - he has a problem now with the angle. He has to adjust his whole body in order to throw that cross.

All that said, I do realize that distance and timing issues come into play here. That's why I plan to do more than just this first vid - and much if it will be spontaneous full contact sparring...not just a static defense against hooks, crosses, or whatever.

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

Knife:

You'll be seeing more clips from me within a few weeks (including full contact settings) - and yes....then you'll have the opportunity to tell us why THOSE techniques won't work either. :rolleyes: :cool:

:D :D :D

[Phil Redmond]

Maybe you could post a clip? I'd be interested to see either of the variations you guys have shown.
For you Dale of course I will. Give me a few days. I have to get with the right guys so you won't say they really aren't trying or aren't skilled.

[Phil Redmond]

I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting to see the clips of these techs used in full contact settings.
I have clips of your fights and I know you can bang but you're not the only one. Anything I advocate I can do. At least for now since I'm 61. You can see some of our techniques used in full contact settings for sure. They are only amatuer (sp)? bouts but our guys won using TWC techniques. Of course it'd be better though to show you the next time I come to L.A. I hope to be there this summer. I have your number and I'll give you a call.

[Phil Redmond]

It appears that both you and Phil are totally open to the cross the most surely is coming from a competent boxer. The other hand always comes. It seems that you are hoping to deal with the other hand by moving away from it. However in the examples shown the boxer could easily land a cross with a simple change of footwork/body facing.

Lol, I'm waiting for the cross, or uppercut, etc. I don't just train with WC people. There are some really good boxing gyms in the hood. People say what can and cannot work without really knowing. But I understand that they won't believe until they try. I'm at 77 Mulberry St. in NYC Sat from 3:30-4:30. Please feel free to drop by.

[Knifefighter]

You'll be seeing more clips from me within a few weeks (including full contact settings) - and yes....then you'll have the opportunity to tell us why THOSE techniques won't work either. :rolleyes: :cool:

While I respect you for putting up your original full contact clips way back when, you've been saying the above for a couple of years now.

[Knifefighter]

You can see some of our techniques used in full contact settings for sure. They are only amatuer (sp)? bouts but our guys won using TWC techniques. Of course it'd be better though to show you the next time I come to L.A. I hope to be there this summer. I have your number and I'll give you a call.

So, why not show a clip of that technique if you already one of your guys using it in a full contact setting?

[Phil Redmond]

So, why not show a clip of that technique if you already one of your guys using it in a full contact setting?
We do fight in competitions and in other settings with people from other disciplines. I might not have a clip of that particular technique but I know you have seen the clip of our guys fighting in the Lei Tai comps. I'll have to make a clip for you with that particular tech.

[Knifefighter]

We do fight in competitions and in other settings with people from other disciplines. I might not have a clip of that particular technique but I know you have seen the clip of our guys fighting in the Lei Tai comps. I'll have to make a clip for you with that particular tech.

If that is the tech you teach for hooks and your guys have been fighting in comps that you have recorded, wouldn't it make sense that you would have clips of them using that tech?

[hunt1]

ol, I'm waiting for the cross, or uppercut, etc. I don't just train with WC people. There are some really good boxing gyms in the hood. People say what can and cannot work without really knowing. But I understand that they won't believe until they try. I'm at 77 Mulberry St. in NYC Sat from 3:30-4:30. Please feel free to drop by.


Well Phil first i find it ironic that while Victor says wing chun skill set is for close range fighting the first you say is that when you are in close you can't see so you must move out to a distance.

Next while It is unfortunate that I am about 2500 miles from you if I am ever in the area I will be sure to stop by. I have always made it a point to visit other wing chun instructors when ever I travel.

I did not mean to imply that what you or Victor would never work just that it has gaps that trained fighters with good flow will take advantage of. The world is full of folks that throw one punch and pull back rinse repeat. Most competitions I have seen are populated by these fighters.

My opinions are based on my training and my training partners. I learned what i know of boxing from a pro light heavy who was skilled enough to be employed by both Larry Holmes and Ken Norton as a sparring partner. If he was good enough for them to pay to train with him then is more than good enough for me to pay attention too.

You are showing a one step method which is fine and you must begin somewhere to teach so perhaps i should not be critical.

However for me you must take into account a fuller range of possibilities than a long range hook that is pulled back to the throwers body or left hanging there.

Hook cross than uppercut from hooking hand is first combo to expect. Hook changes to uppercut upon contact followed by cross is next . Hooker skips back now you are at pre contact again or person as grappling skills and the hook grabs the bil hand or does their version of a jut lap jum etc while throwing a cross or finishing a throw. Not everyone can do these things but if you prepare for them then when you find a nice one punch at a time guy the world is good.

Oh and as far as bad mothers in the area to train with. Winkeljohn is right next door and our school is in with a top judo school and we have open door and mats on saturday. I am fortunate to have some of the top MMA fighters in the world stop in and welcome me to their school. I know what skilled folks can do first hand

[Phil Redmond]

If that is the tech you teach for hooks and your guys have been fighting in comps that you have recorded, wouldn't it make sense that you would have clips of them using that tech?
I'll presume that there are many people who don't have footage of every single sparring/training session or whatever. But I will look through the footage of the other elimination bouts to see if that particular technique was used.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . .
Oh and as far as bad mothers in the area to train with. Winkeljohn is right next door and our school is in with a top judo school and we have open door and mats on saturday. I am fortunate to have some of the top MMA fighters in the world stop in and welcome me to their school. I know what skilled folks can do first hand
Got your point. I was just making a point that we train with guys that aren't scrubs and I see you do as well. But I don't get it when I've made something work and have seen others make it work and someone says that it can't work. Go figure.

[Knifefighter]

I'll presume that there are many people who don't have footage of every single sparring/training session or whatever. But I will look through the footage of the other elimination bouts to see if that particular technique was used.

If that is the tech you teach for the hook, it should be a bread and butter tech and should be all over the place whenever hooks are thrown.

[Phil Redmond]

If that is the tech you teach for the hook, it should be a bread and butter tech and should be all over the place whenever hooks are thrown.
It's not way to deal with a hook.

[Knifefighter]

It's not way to deal with a hook.

Huh? Then why are you demonstrating it?

[kung fu fighter]

Lol, I'm waiting for the cross, or uppercut, etc. I don't just train with WC people. There are some really good boxing gyms in the hood. People say what can and cannot work without really knowing. But I understand that they won't believe until they try. I'm at 77 Mulberry St. in NYC Sat from 3:30-4:30. Please feel free to drop by.

it's childish to drop challenges like this, do you even know who Hunt1 is? if you you did, i highly doubt you would have said this. Most of us are on here for discussion to make our wing chun understanding better, not to increase the size of our egos. Although i like Vic's aliveness in the clip and his willingness to share, i tend to agree with Hunt in regards to gaps in the defense, that's why i suggested that he post some sparring clips in real time. Constructive critisims are always good, since we can benefit from the experience of others.

[sanjuro_ronin]

it's childish to drop challenges like this, do you even know who Hunt1 is? if you you did, i highly doubt you would have said this. Most of us are on here for discussion to make our wing chun understanding better, not to increase the size of our egos. Although i like Vic's aliveness in the clip and his willingness to share, i tend to agree with Hunt in regards to gaps in the defense, that's why i suggested that he post some sparring clips in real time. Constructive critisims are always good, since we can benefit from the experience of others.

That wasn't a challenge, it was a friendly offer, one that Phil extends to everyone.

[Phil Redmond]

Huh? Then why are you demonstrating it?
Oops, typo. That should have read
It's not the only way to deal with a hook

[Phil Redmond]

it's childish to drop challenges like this, do you even know who Hunt1 is? if you you did, i highly doubt you would have said this. Most of us are on here for discussion to make our wing chun understanding better, not to increase the size of our egos. Although i like Vic's aliveness in the clip and his willingness to share, i tend to agree with Hunt in regards to gaps in the defense, that's why i suggested that he post some sparring clips in real time. Constructive critisims are always good, since we can benefit from the experience of others.
Making challenges is not my M.O. You misinterpreted my post. Heck, I even invited you to come to the Toronto seminar. That wasn't a challenge.

[Vajramusti]

Without getting into lineage differences:

1. Much to what Hunt had to say.

2. FWIW- IMO- if the wing chun structure, timing and foot work is done well,
with proper timing-learned from various forms of good chi sao-gasp!)- you can move in and just punch the guy without waiting to use a pre-meditated technique to block the hook.If you hesitate -you could be cooked/clocked. Wing chun folks can do it from their structural dynamics and good boxers can do it from theirs. A very good example of the latter for me in the late 70s was when Sugar Ray Leonard fought a South American boxer in Tucson. Gonzales? I had a seat just behind ringside.
The South American had very good fast left hooks both long and short. For the first minute or two in the first round Sugar picked up the sense of the hook: and then bam a straight- Sugar Ray right dumped the hooker before he could land.End of fight.
Regarding the latter- I have seen good handling of hooks with

a wc basic timed kuen and have done it myself. It also helps when you know what good hooks really are.There is life beyond U Tube and home movies..

joy chaudhuri

PS:I dont want to carry the boxing examples too far: alzeimers and Parkinson's and other "friends" have greeted lots of pugs. Ingemar johansen died this week after a battle with Alzheimers-Robinson, Louis, Ali, Patterson among so many others were affected by head shots.
Football players are getting it too these days. Imperfect models to follow for long term self defense development. But Ingemars straght right- the "toonder"-the hammer of Thor- beat Patterson's hook in their first fight. But Patterson's leaping well timed left hook dropped Johansen in the second fight. Timing is an important variable.
Eye problems are also common-Sugar ray- detavhed retina, Aaron Pryor -basically blind.
(no proof reading, sorry- gotta go)

[Phil Redmond]

. . . do you even know who Hunt1 is? if you you did, i highly doubt you would have said this. . .
??? I just re-read your post.
What does that have to do with anything? I say what I feel regardless of who it is.

[Mr Punch]

Great post Hunt.

'kung fu fighter' - get the **** outta here with your childish crap. :)

[Ultimatewingchun]

'Well Phil first i find it ironic that while Victor says wing chun skill set is for close range fighting the first you say is that when you are in close you can't see so you must move out to a distance." (Hunt)


***While I'm good friends with Phil for many years, please understand that my take on wing chun - and my understanding about how to apply it - aren't necessarily the same as Phil's. Not only about what to do on the inside (ie.- I incorporate wrestling into what I do, including clinch work - and Phil doesn't do that)... but some things that I do from other ranges are not necessarily how Phil sees it or does it.

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


"Next while It is unfortunate that I am about 2500 miles from you if I am ever in the area I will be sure to stop by. I have always made it a point to visit other wing chun instructors when ever I travel. (Hunt)

***I don't think Phil was challenging you.

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


"I did not mean to imply that what you or Victor would never work just that it has gaps that trained fighters with good flow will take advantage of. The world is full of folks that throw one punch and pull back rinse repeat. Most competitions I have seen are populated by these fighters." (Hunt)

***Correct. And that's one of the reasons why I'm going to put up "live" vids. The reason why I haven't done so in about 3-4 years now is because I'm weak with computer knowledge. The woman in my class who filmed and edited for me the last time left the school - and it wasn't until just a few months ago that I now have someone else to do that for me. So stay tuned...

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


"Hook, cross, then uppercut from hooking hand is first combo to expect." (Hunt)

***Have worked against this many times - and yes I have answers to this from the wing chun/boxing (along the TWC central line) that I've been talking about for the longest - including possibly clinching and wrestling work as well - depending upon the circumstances. Plan to show ALL of these things in future vids.

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

"Hook changes to uppercut upon contact followed by cross is next." (Hunt)

***See the answer immediately above - and "ditto".

[hunt1]

Hi Victor, I didn't take it as a challenge. I have always visited wing chun schools when I have traveled. Always looking for new ways to do things . My personal belief is everyone has something they can teach you if you listen. Besides that's what we have chi sau for. We can get a feel of anothers skill without having to have our teeth knocked out.

I understand you and Phil are different I just saw the difference interesting considering the similar backgrounds and years of wing chun.

Phil sorry for any misunderstanding the hardest thing on forums to understand is tone and intent. Words can take many meanings when that's all we have to base understanding on.

[duende]

Hook cross than uppercut from hooking hand is first combo to expect. Hook changes to uppercut upon contact followed by cross is next . Hooker skips back now you are at pre contact again or person as grappling skills and the hook grabs the bil hand or does their version of a jut lap jum etc while throwing a cross or finishing a throw. Not everyone can do these things but if you prepare for them then when you find a nice one punch at a time guy the world is good.


Exactly! The uppercut or the shoot is right there.

I do believe a biu can work, however side-stepping and relying soley on the creation of distance to gain time in order to avoid the cross in this scenario is not always the best answer imo. As the space can easily be traced and crashed by the boxer changing his facing and keeping his forward pressure on.

Not saying it won't work. But as mentioned, it does leave some openings to be concerned of imo.

[Phil Redmond]

Hi Victor, I didn't take it as a challenge. I have always visited wing chun schools when I have traveled. Always looking for new ways to do things . My personal belief is everyone has something they can teach you if you listen. Besides that's what we have chi sau for. We can get a feel of anothers skill without having to have our teeth knocked out.

I understand you and Phil are different I just saw the difference interesting considering the similar backgrounds and years of wing chun.

Phil sorry for any misunderstanding the hardest thing on forums to understand is tone and intent. Words can take many meanings when that's all we have to base understanding on.
My posting the addy of the Chinatown class wasn't directed at you. It was for any WC guy who wanted to drop by.
I like WC so I'll always take the opportunity to meet with other WChunners regardless of lineage. I've even been invited to meet with another WC Sifu by a forum member and I'm going though he's not my lineage.
Since Navin has the word 'fighter' in his screenname I presumed he'd be cool training with us. I invited him as my guest for the Toronto seminar but he refused because he said he wasn't interested in Yip Man WC. :(
I know from reading your posts over a while that you're no scrub.
Since I don't know everything it would be nice to learn/exchange/train with guys like you. That's why I have an open door policy. (excuse typos. in a hurry)

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I do believe a biu can work, however side-stepping and relying solely on the creation of distance to gain time in order to avoid the cross in this scenario is not always the best answer imo. As the space can easily be traced and crashed by the boxer changing his facing and keeping his forward pressure on." (duende)


***EXACTLY. That is why one MUST be familiar with clinch work/wrestling/grappling, imo...Trying to create distance doesn't always work. You have to be able to fight in all ranges - as the boxer, grappler, etc. can crash the distance, as you put it, while pressuring forward at you even deeper than striking range.

[Phil Redmond]

I did go into it on the vid...


It's different from Phil's (I explain/demo this on the last part) in that the centerline turned towards his far shoulder (the way Phil did it) does not allow me to immediately hit him with my other hand with any serious penetration/force.

He therefore has the opportunity to continue his attack unimpeded because he's not getting hit by me or controlled by me sufficiently.
The audio wasn't to good in my clip. But I did say the centerline lop would be better because I could strike at the same time. But there are instances where there are multiple attackers and I wouldn't want to face the point of contact and have my back to another person. That's where I'd use the central line lop from the TWC CK form.

[AdrianK]

Imperfect models to follow for long term self defense development.

:confused: - Are you saying that boxing is an imperfect model of self-defense that will lead to these issues?

Actually the reason they develop those issues is because they've fought against the best and strongest people in the world, professionals who have hit them numerous times. I can tell you, it doesn't matter WHAT YOU KNOW, if Sugar Ray Leonard in his prime, wanted to hit you, he **** well could.

Boxing has plenty of models to follow for not getting hit, but the reality is, getting hit is a part of fighting. And getting hit leads to these issues. No matter what style you practice.

[Matrix]

Hi Victor, I didn't take it as a challenge. I have always visited wing chun schools when I have traveled. Always looking for new ways to do things . My personal belief is everyone has something they can teach you if you listen. Besides that's what we have chi sau for. We can get a feel of anothers skill without having to have our teeth knocked out.Hunt1,

IMO, this is a great attitude to have. We need to be open to what others have to offer. Unfortunately in the WC world we often see the exact opposite, and we are all the poorer for it. No one group has a lock on " the truth".
I also agree with your point on chi sau. I have a decent dental plan, but I still want to keep my teeth. ;)

Peace,
Bill

[Matrix]

Somehow I doubt you are going to see that work in a real-time environment.Dale,
I agree with you. I'm just curious what you think is the most effective way to deal with a hook?

Thanks,
Bill

[Ultimatewingchun]

Intend to put up at least one new vid in the coming weeks, but in the meantime I feel compelled to say a few things again about the bil sao/lop sao method of stopping hooks - and of the importance of watching the opponent's elbows.

In wing chun arm positioning, with the elbows held close to the sides of the body and the hands and arms also in - so that the centerline/central lines are protected...the guy throwing the hook (no matter how tight) will have to go around your arms...thereby giving you a slight advantage in terms of speed and control...

because you have the inside position.

A similar concept in wrestling/grappling to having inside control with bicep ties, underhooks, collar ties, etc. The man with the inside position has a slight built-in advantage just by virtue of his positioning.

So there is a built-in slight advantage to the wing chun basic hand positioning against round/hook punches...

WHEN IN CLOSE TO THE OPPONENT.

As I've said a thousand times by now, from a distance this can actually become a disadvantage if his arms are longer and you're not watching alertly, if your body positioning and footwork is lacking, if you don't understand (or are slow) in doi ying (facing), etc. etc. He can hook around your arms and hit you in the side of the face or head, the body, etc.

And being vulnerable to the hook off the jab is a very big example of how this can work against you from a longer distance. So you HAVE TO BE watching his lead elbow directly (and the rest of his points indirectly with peripheral vision, ie.- his other elbow and his knees)...

if you want to use wing chun methods to counter the jab, the hook off the jab, uppercuts, the rear cross, etc. (And watching the knees is how you effectively counter his kicks).

Because elbows move slower than fists and knees move slower than feet when strikes/kicks are being thrown at you - since they travel to a shorter distance in the same amount of time as the hand or foot does - so they have to be moving slower...

and therefore...easier to see...therefore providing you TIME to deal with what's coming.

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

NOW, as to REAL TIME fighting/sparring...as I said earlier, it will rarely come out exactly as you saw it on the vid, ie.- he will set it up differently, you both will be moving - thereby changing the timing and distance dynamics, (ie.- you may decide to come in and hit first)...you may have to block and hit back with an elbow or a forearm or a palm strike instead of a punch, you may have to interrupt your first move (and not actually complete your punch into his shoulder or face - or perhaps not even complete the bil/lop sao)...and immediately turn to face and counter the punch coming from his left hand...

because immediately upon contact (or even before contact) while blocking or preparing to block his first punch at his leading elbow with bil/lop...you start looking directly at his other elbow since you now see the other hand starting to come - so you interrupt your first move in time to deal with it, etc.

SO MY FIRST VID WAS JUST A MODEL TO WORK WITH.

In other words, inside positioning is very conducive to the bil/lop and hit with the other arm wing chun response to the hook or round punches.

[deejaye72]

i sparred a friend of mine once who was an amauteur boxer,he also out weighed me buy like 60 pounds. i weighed at the time like 130 he was 190.we did three 1 minute rounds.during the exchange there was no time for bil sao's and compound trapping.but,what did work was whenever he turned i faced him and,when ever he moved whether it was a jab,cross etc.i hit him straight down the centerline.in the second round i hit him straight in the nose and knocked against the wall in his garage and bloodied his nose.
the best shot he got on me was when he started to bob and weave and break the rythm,he faked a low punch to a tight hook to the head with the same hand.but,i dominated the fight.i tracked(faced)him everywhere he moved and as soon as he moved, i cracked him right down the centerline.
straight hitting is always more efficient.blocking to me is always a last resort, kinda like covering.in the above exchange there was no time for fancy moves against him.my heart was pounding after the sparring match because he was a lot bigger then me and more experienced.but,i just did what my dad always taught me and it worked(pops is my sifu).now,this is not to say i dont work the bil sao,gon sao gate drills i do,it's just that a lot of that stuff doesnt work against people from differnet styles.boxers retract there hand real fast after punching and there is no bridging.anyway i agree with most of y'all and vick thankyou for posting the video it was great.i think everyone should give him a round of applause for stepping up to the plate and putting his video up for scrutinzing.
thats why i love this forum even thought i dont write alot guys like vic keep it real.and no i'm not a twc guy either i just enjoy his realistic thoughts on combat.if i ever get to new york again this year i'm gonna look him up,as i was invited last year when i was there but,lots of family stuff got in the way.i'm really curious about his grappling addtions.
thanks guys
eddie