Mixing Wing Chun with a grappling style?

[Keefer]

Would mixing WC with any grappling style make a WC practioner more prepared for any type of attack or would it make his/her WC watered down?

[Mr Punch]

LOL, silly me!

welcome to the forum!

so sorry to see you leave so soon.....

the bridge is that way --------------->

[Ultimatewingchun]

Well, considering that you have made only 4 posts, one has to wonder if this is one big troll job. :rolleyes:

But if not, then indeed...welcome to the forum! :cool:

[Vajramusti]

Another one attempting to push buttons, me thinks.

joy chaudhuri

[Lee Chiang Po]

If you will examine all the grappling systems you will see that most of them will have pretty close to the same basic methods. When learning WC I was taught many of these same methods, so I was of the opinion that it was also part of the WC system. I still think it is. I have also learned the system of Japanese Jujitsu, which has all the same techniques of most of the other systems. WC and JJJ marry very well. JJJ can be brutal, but it can be used when you do not feel the need to be brutal. It is called the gental art. WC is more a brutal system designed to inflict pain and injury if not death. With JJJ you can slam people into the ground, break limbs or neck, strangle someone to death, all sorts of things. Or you can use a wrist lock to control someone. You see lots of submissions in the ring using arm and leg holds and chokes. What other grappling system were you considering?

[anerlich]

Would mixing WC with any grappling style make a WC practioner more prepared for any type of attack or would it make his/her WC watered down?

There's lots of threads on this already. Everything there is to say has already been said on them.

[monji112000]

Would mixing WC with any grappling style make a WC practioner more prepared for any type of attack or would it make his/her WC watered down?

don't mind the negative people. If you have the time how could it have any effect on your wc? they are completly different. One could make the argument that training other striking arts could "water down" your wing chun, but the problem I could see is taking your time. If you are like me and you don't have a life.. why not?

I would suggest Judo with a little BJJ. Judo mixes very well with WC and it deals with clinching something WC doesn't really. If you have more time then BJJ is a great grappling art. I would avoid any style that is based on allot of power. Allot of grapplers(none BJJ) like to dog BJJ,but really BJJ today encompasses all grappling arts. A majority of BJJ schools take techniques and ideas from CSW, catch, greco, judo ect.. so really its becoming more of a general term.

Have you tried a class? its a great sport! It has done allot for my chi sao.

[AdrianK]

Knowledge cannot take away from any other knowledge.

There is no style which you can practice, that will make your own style any less.

Certain styles may give you "bad habits" from one persons opinion, or another, but as an intelligent martial artist you will eventually work those out.

Or maybe you won't. Either way, unless you seek knowledge from more than one source, you will never realize your full potential.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Would mixing WC with any grappling style make a WC practioner more prepared for any type of attack or would it make his/her WC watered down?

Mixing WC and grappling is fine. All of my students also study BJJ. However, from an instructional stand point I do not spend time trying to integrate them because in WC class I am trying to teach a very specific set of skills irrespective of whether it would work in MMA or against a grappler. I tell my students to leave their BJJ at home for WC class and vice versa.

In short develop each art fully for what they are don't turn every lesson into a mixed martial arts class and take what your instructor gives you for what it is in each art and you will much better off in the long run.

[TenTigers]

tools is tools. period.

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I would suggest reading "Living the Martial Way". An excellent read which addresss the idea of cross training.

The book stresses the idea of building upon your core style or system. In other words take the other arts and mold them to your original core.

IMHO, too many people try to grapple a grappler or box a boxer, in other words fighting their fight. When instead they should utilize an understanding of the opponents techniques and use that to enhance their own training. Intergrate it into your core system don't disregard your core art but take the time to delve deeply and incorporate.

This is nothing new........warriors have been doing it for centuries. Many well known martial styles were only available to people with prior training in another art.

[AdrianK]

^
The problem I have with this is that there is too much focus on styles or systems being central to how you fight. How you fight should be a natural expression based on your strengths and understanding of how your body functions... not a recital of trained movements. The trained movements are simply a means to understanding how your body works, and these movements should be able to be infinitely variable.

For instance, as someone who has trained in wing chun, you wouldn't sit your ass down with 70 percent of your weight on the back leg unless the situation called for it or you were naturally better suited for this position. (that being said, anyone who says wing chun techniques are only effective from this stance or that stance, or whatever, has no understanding of the style conceptually) Thus it is a necessity to find not only your own most comfortable stance for your body type, but also one that makes sense from a defensive standpoint.

Now, when you say, too many people try to grapple a grappler, you are not playing their game by grappling with them, grappling is not style or game-specific, its a way of describing fighting when grabbing or holding with someone, or in otherwords, a close in-fight, usually on your back or fighting an opponent who is on their back... But no matter what style you do, BJJ, Wing Chun, Tae Kwon Do - Grappling is a part of fighting. You may have someone whose gameplan is focused on grappling, but Grappling itself is not a gameplan.

That being said, no matter what your supposedly "core" style is(but honestly, all stylistic boundries should be dissolved by the point that you're fighting confidently with what you know, there should be no "Core" style because all logical concepts are expressed through a person, not through a system), you need to do what you are good at. If that means you've been training wing chun for 30 years, have no grappling experience but naturally are a better grappler/wrestler, then the smartest thing to do would be to wrestle/grapple. Thats just common sense. Unfortunately many martial artists go against it! :D

[anerlich]

In short develop each art fully for what they are don't turn every lesson into a mixed martial arts class and take what your instructor gives you for what it is in each art and you will much better off in the long run.

I agree with this - I too study and teach both WC and BJJ.

I think there is also a need for an occasional MMA. or integration class. You don't want to teach what one of the more prolific but less intelligent posters here called a "mishmash" or "glorified kickboxing", but IMO self defense and MMA have some skill sets outside both pure BJJ and traditional WC.

[Yoshiyahu]

Andriank Said
If that means you've been training wing chun for 30 years, have no grappling experience but naturally are a better grappler/wrestler, then the smartest thing to do would be to wrestle/grapple.

What if your better at Striking than grappling. You tried Grappling styles in the past and found them inferior to your purpose? An found you are more incline to striking due to your natural ability to generate significant speed and power with your fist??

[anerlich]

What if your better at Striking than grappling. You tried Grappling styles in the past and found them inferior to your purpose? An found you are more incline to striking due to your natural ability to generate significant speed and power with your fist??

IMO your fighting effectiveness is like the strength of a chain, viz only as strong as the weakest link. True effectiveness comes from working on and eliminating your weaknesses.

[punchdrunk]

It's a good idea to get as much experience and knowledge as possible, but I would suggest taking the time and dedication to learn the basics of one first say at least 6 months of dedicated training before tackling another. Simply because it could be confusing, but crosstraining is a great way to gain experience and open yourself to new ideas. So is simply sparring with people from other systems and trading ideas.

[AdrianK]

Andriank Said

What if your better at Striking than grappling. You tried Grappling styles in the past and found them inferior to your purpose? An found you are more incline to striking due to your natural ability to generate significant speed and power with your fist??

If you're better at striking than grappling, then you try to keep the fight standing up, but always be as prepared as possible for a fight on the ground. Its a way of fighting that you cannot avoid in a general sense.

The idea that grappling is inferior to your purpose is ridiculous. Its like a grappler saying striking is inferior to their purpose. The fact of the matter is, grapplers cannot avoid striking, and strikers cannot avoid grappling, in a general sense.

What that means is, there is never NOT going to be a chance that you will run into someone who can take you to the ground. And there is never NOT going to be a chance that a grappler is going to run into a striker who can keep them on their feet. The ideas may sound contridactory, but they're not and the reason why is because you never know who your next opponent is going to be, their skill level, or anything like that. Thus, you need to be prepared to fight not just in your strength but also in your weaknesses. A well rounded fighter can handle a greater number of opponents than a fighter who has only one specialty.

That being said, from a martial arts perspective, grappling is a part of fighting, not a style of fighting, thus as said before, it cannot be inferior to your purpose, your purpose is to fight in the situations where fighting is necessary. And the idea of a level of control over any situation to the point where you won't ever be on your back or on the ground, fighting, shows a very clear lack of understanding of the way the world works. There is very little control you can exercise over a dangerous situation.

[taai gihk yahn]

oh, where is HW108 to pound some sense into all of your knuckley-heads and shine the light of truth onto the path for the newbie troll? :p

[Violent Designs]

Glorified Wrestlers?

[Kansuke]

Wrestlers are already glorious.

[Genetic]

Would mixing WC with any grappling style make a WC practioner more prepared for any type of attack or would it make his/her WC watered down?

Grappling is really important in a modern martial art, if you want to be an all round fighter. Fortunately WC is already crammed full of grappling, its all there in the forms right in plain sight. If you can see it. It doesnt deal with groundfighting though, so this would have to come from outside of the system, it just isnt there.

Mixing WC with other grappling styles wouldnt water it down, but merely compliment it. Its already there, but there are still new concepts and directions to learn. e.g. underhooks, overhooks etc etc.

WC is a lot more flexible than the constrictive moulds some people try to constrain it to through their lack of understanding.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Fortunately WC is already crammed full of grappling, its all there in the forms right in plain sight. If you can see it.

Which one is it? plain sight or if you can see it ?
:D

[t_niehoff]

Grappling is really important in a modern martial art, if you want to be an all round fighter. Fortunately WC is already crammed full of grappling, its all there in the forms right in plain sight. If you can see it. It doesnt deal with groundfighting though, so this would have to come from outside of the system, it just isnt there.

Mixing WC with other grappling styles wouldnt water it down, but merely compliment it. Its already there, but there are still new concepts and directions to learn. e.g. underhooks, overhooks etc etc.

WC is a lot more flexible than the constrictive moulds some people try to constrain it to through their lack of understanding.

As I see WCK, the method (faat) or basic gameplan of WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

Moreover, as I see it, WCK is essentially a basic framework (like any other martial art), and you can add to the framework without compromising its integrity.

[JPinAZ]

As I see WCK, the method (faat) or basic gameplan of WCK is to control the opponent while striking him.

To an extent, I agree with you here.



To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

I totally disagree. You don't have to 'grapple' someone to take control of them (and by control, I am assuming you are meaning thier COG & limbs). You do have to connect with your opponent, have a superior position and proper leverage, but you don't have to grab or hold them tocontrol them.

Grapple (from dictionary.com):
verb (used without object)
1. to hold or make fast to something, as with a grapple.
..
3. to seize another, or each other, in a firm grip, as in wrestling; clinch.
4. to engage in a struggle or close encounter (usually fol. by with): He was grappling with a boy twice his size.

–verb (used with object)
6. to seize, hold, or fasten with or as with a grapple.
7. to seize in a grip, take hold of: The thug grappled him around the neck

Even in the technique lop sau, you shouldn't have a firm hold or grasp on your opponent. You shouldn't totally grab with your thumb and hold on - that would be grappling by definition. This would slow you down and give some of your advantage back to your opponent. You would then have to release your grab if you wanted to strike which gives your opponent time to react.

Chi Sau in the traditional sense is surely about bridging and controlling your opponent, but it's not grappling either. Grappling only can happen when you lose your advantage of control in the chi sau moment ;)

[Wayfaring]

Even in the technique lop sau, you shouldn't have a firm hold or grasp on your opponent. You shouldn't totally grab with your thumb and hold on - that would be grappling by definition. This would slow you down and give some of your advantage back to your opponent. You would then have to release your grab if you wanted to strike which gives your opponent time to react.

Actually, a proper grip on a kimono or clothes in grappling does not involve totally grabbing with your thumb and holding on - that expends too much energy and leaves you stiff which allows your opponent a lever. Proper sleeve / collar grip is bottom 3 fingers. Loose, but pulling away it gets tighter. Or leaves you free to release and move.

Like lop sau, no?

[Wayfaring]

As I see WCK, the method (faat) or basic gameplan of WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

So how well does your chi sau / lop sau "grappling" work against BJJ black belts?

That said I agree also that the method/faat/gameplan of WCK is you controlling your space and your opponents space. To control an opponent can happen with a bridge, but can also happen with superior positioning without a bridge.

[Eric_H]

Actually, a proper grip on a kimono or clothes in grappling does not involve totally grabbing with your thumb and holding on - that expends too much energy and leaves you stiff which allows your opponent a lever. Proper sleeve / collar grip is bottom 3 fingers. Loose, but pulling away it gets tighter. Or leaves you free to release and move.

Like lop sau, no?

Depends which Lop ;)

As for mixing grappling with WC, I agree with some of what was said above. A person should go out and play and experience different styles as the opportunity becomes available to them, especially if a high-level teacher falls in your path. Just know that if you stick with WC, eventually the two won't mix and you'll have to choose one over the other.

[t_niehoff]

So how well does your chi sau / lop sau "grappling" work against BJJ black belts?

That said I agree also that the method/faat/gameplan of WCK is you controlling your space and your opponents space. To control an opponent can happen with a bridge, but can also happen with superior positioning without a bridge.

The "grappling" I'm talking about takes place STANDING.

Space is an aspect of control, as is positioning. A "bridge" is required. What I mean by "bridge" is a connection to the opponent (not necessarily with his arm). Without contact, there can be no control.

[t_niehoff]

To an extent, I agree with you here.


I don't really care whether someone who does fantasy fu agrees with me or not.



I totally disagree. You don't have to 'grapple' someone to take control of them (and by control, I am assuming you are meaning thier COG & limbs). You do have to connect with your opponent, have a superior position and proper leverage, but you don't have to grab or hold them tocontrol them.

Grapple (from dictionary.com):
verb (used without object)
1. to hold or make fast to something, as with a grapple.
..
3. to seize another, or each other, in a firm grip, as in wrestling; clinch.
4. to engage in a struggle or close encounter (usually fol. by with): He was grappling with a boy twice his size.

–verb (used with object)
6. to seize, hold, or fasten with or as with a grapple.
7. to seize in a grip, take hold of: The thug grappled him around the neck


Semantics. "Grappling" is maintaining sustained contact with an opponent. Naturally it does involve holding/seizing but there are also other aspects (like pressing, spreading, jerking, etc.). And there are varying degrees of control. To fully control someone for anything other than a very brief period of time, you must grab them. Should you ever learn WCK, you'll see this is true.



Even in the technique lop sau, you shouldn't have a firm hold or grasp on your opponent. You shouldn't totally grab with your thumb and hold on - that would be grappling by definition. This would slow you down and give some of your advantage back to your opponent. You would then have to release your grab if you wanted to strike which gives your opponent time to react.


All of this is nonsense. And, I can tell by your description that you think the objective of the lop sao exercise is to strike the opponent. It's not.



Chi Sau in the traditional sense is surely about bridging and controlling your opponent, but it's not grappling either. Grappling only can happen when you lose your advantage of control in the chi sau moment ;)


Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling. There are many different ways to maintain sustained contact. Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

[Eric_H]

Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling. There are many different ways to maintain sustained contact. Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

Not true, sustained arm to arm contact is called bridging. It's a hallmark of most Chinese martial arts, you should try to learn one sometime.

To a degree you are right, Lop Sao isn't about "hitting" it's about controlling facing and re-establishing your own. As WCK is a striking art, once you establish proper range and facing, you should hit. So from another point it is about hitting, it always is....

[JPinAZ]

I don't really care whether someone who does fantasy fu agrees with me or not.

Semantics. "Grappling" is maintaining sustained contact with an opponent. Naturally it does involve holding/seizing but there are also other aspects (like pressing, spreading, jerking, etc.). And there are varying degrees of control. To fully control someone for anything other than a very brief period of time, you must grab them. Should you ever learn WCK, you'll see this is true.

All of this is nonsense. And, I can tell by your description that you think the objective of the lop sao exercise is to strike the opponent. It's not.

Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling. There are many different ways to maintain sustained contact. Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

Hahaha, still have your panties on too tight I see!

Whatever you think you know about me doesn't change the fact that you only have a surface level understanding of WCK at best. And don't act like you know what 'chi sau' is. One minute you are saying Chi Sau is "grappling with striking", then you are saying it's an "artificial, unrealistic excersize". Are you saying when someone controls and hits you, it's not realistic?

BTW dumb a$$, I was talking about a lap sau technique, not some "lop sau excersize". That's why I used the word 'technique'. Didn't they teach you to read in law school? Maybe you need those Hooked on Phonics books like your friend Hendrik..

[sanjuro_ronin]

Not true, sustained arm to arm contact is called bridging. It's a hallmark of most Chinese martial arts, you should try to learn one sometime.

.

Bridging is not SUSTAINED anything, that is a very rudimentary view of bridging.
Contact is bridging, but it doesn't need, nor should it be(typically), sustained.
You can even bridge with NO contact.

[monji112000]

So how well does your chi sau / lop sau "grappling" work against BJJ black belts?


just to play devils advocate, I train with a Brown belt who uses "chi sao", and has picked it up on his own. He uses it for grip fighting and setting things up. I one day asked him what exactly he was doing and he told me he watches "wing chun sticky hands". He has a better bong sao(and understanding of it) then I would say most wing chun people. Its pretty cool some of the stuff he does. He does allot of redirects into things like arm drags ect.. I havn't really tried allot of that stuff its over my head.. but its a great idea i'm going to add to my game.

stuff that I see allot is bong sao and tan sao redirecting and fook sao. I use gua sao allot andlop sao

I use chi sao ideas and wing chun ideas all the time when I roll. I roll with black belts, brown belts, purples, blues, and whites. I'm sure if we would discuss what I mean by ideas we would have a very different view.

[Eric_H]

Bridging is not SUSTAINED anything, that is a very rudimentary view of bridging.
Contact is bridging, but it doesn't need, nor should it be(typically), sustained.
You can even bridge with NO contact.

Yes, bridging may also interchangeably used with the strategy of setup (bai jong) intercepting (jeet kiu). What's your point?

Since the discussion is about chi sao, chi sao is bridging, not grappling as is the point i was refuting.

[vingtsunplaya]

Semantics are a real b!tch huh? Wouldn't it be nice if we could all meet up and really see who has kung fu? Chi Sau? The ability to speak engish?

I guess my point is, if you are going to get on a FORUM and talk $heit, you should probably be CLEAR about what you are talking about. One second some of you are talking about chi sau, the next yer talking about grappling, then the next you are talking abou "fantasy fu".

The original question had to do with combining WC with grappling. In my opinion, as someone said earlier, it is good to have a working knowledge about how some butt licker is going to try to get you to the ground, but if you are a WC guy, then you hit him as he bends down to start playing with your genitals. You hit him right in the face. Hard. :mad:

[AdrianK]

but if you are a WC guy, then you hit him as he bends down to start playing with your genitals. You hit him right in the face. Hard.

You forgot to include the rest of how this plays out. After you hit him in the face hard, he deals with getting hit and continues to grab your legs and slam you on your back, then force-feeds you some knuckle-sandwiches.

The whole strike-defense to a shoot is about the stupidest ****ing idea out there, unless the guy you're fighting is 120lb emo kid. This has been proven time and again in MMA. Hitting a guy shooting at you DOESNT STOP THEM. And fights aren't won by single strikes.

[t_niehoff]

Hahaha, still have your panties on too tight I see!


No, I just don't care about the "HFY perspective" -- which I think is just piles of Garrett Gee's theory (the sh1t that it is) on top of TWC.



Whatever you think you know about me doesn't change the fact that you only have a surface level understanding of WCK at best. And don't act like you know what 'chi sau' is. One minute you are saying Chi Sau is "grappling with striking", then you are saying it's an "artificial, unrealistic excersize". Are you saying when someone controls and hits you, it's not realistic?


The drill is an unrealistic exercise. Read the **** thread and get someone with half a brain (outside of HFY) to help you, and you might understand what I mean. That the drill is unrealistic doesn't affect what you are drilling/exercising.



BTW dumb a$$, I was talking about a lap sau technique, not some "lop sau excersize". That's why I used the word 'technique'. Didn't they teach you to read in law school? Maybe you need those Hooked on Phonics books like your friend Hendrik..

I guess you don't practice the lop sao technique in the lop sao drill.

[t_niehoff]

Not true, sustained arm to arm contact is called bridging. It's a hallmark of most Chinese martial arts, you should try to learn one sometime.


Sustained arm contact is just ONE way to creat a bridge. A bridge is any structure that connects me to my opponent.



To a degree you are right, Lop Sao isn't about "hitting" it's about controlling facing and re-establishing your own. As WCK is a striking art, once you establish proper range and facing, you should hit. So from another point it is about hitting, it always is....

WCK's method is to control while striking. It is the control that provides our safety and sets up the striking. The notion that "once you establish proper range and facing, you should hit" won't stop himfrom hitting you back (and your opponent can change facing in a split second as he hits). Saying "WCK is a striking art" is to miss the most important aspect of WCK, the control. It's like saying that GNP is a "striking approach". Sure, but it is the control on the ground that makes GNP work Just like it is the control that makes WCK work.

[Eric_H]

Sustained arm contact is just ONE way to creat a bridge. A bridge is any structure that connects me to my opponent.



Yeah, i just said that in my post above.





WCK's method is to control while striking. It is the control that provides our safety and sets up the striking. The notion that "once you establish proper range and facing, you should hit" won't stop himfrom hitting you back (and your opponent can change facing in a split second as he hits). Saying "WCK is a striking art" is to miss the most important aspect of WCK, the control. It's like saying that GNP is a "striking approach". Sure, but it is the control on the ground that makes GNP work Just like it is the control that makes WCK work.

So your point is to control the person before you hit. That isn't any different from establishing proper range and facing, those are what give you the control.

That still doesn't mean that chi sao = grappling as you said before.

[Yoshiyahu]

Hear is a realistic drill.

There was this hood girl right. She asked me about my Art...I said I train Wing Chun. She said what is that. I told her a little she said that stuff sounds like something for people who can't fight...She asked can I use it...I said sure. I told her to hit me as hard as she could in my chest. She threw punch but it was way out of range it didn't even make contact with my guards. So I said listen really hit me. She was like don't hit back okay...I assured her...So What I did so she could know how to punch was put my hands behind my back an let her get a free hit with out me defending...So she hit me as hard as she could in my chest and stomach before I could say okay not pun....ch. I just use my breath to absorb it. Then I said okay again...So she threw her hard punch and it was kinda of low so I bong sau. Since she was trying to wallop me again upon impact she hurt her arm with my bong sau deflecting her force she drop to her knees. An was like what the f*** was that man your arms feel like metal or something...

An then again at a Tai Chi class. I told this big huge guy...he is like 6'8" are something I am 5'8" I told him to throw a round house. He threw a low one. I told him to throw it higher. I high low gan sau his left leg two or three times. He switch legs. An I did the same to his right leg. He said after about three times of thats enough and shook his leg off. He never said how my arms felt. But when he stop firing his hard hits I knew.

Later I had him throw random punches..So I could defend against it. He typically only threw punches with his right. So it was more like a drill rather in realistic.
So I had to coach him to really make contact with me. He kept pulling his punches and holding it back. So I grap his fist an pulled it to my chest said stop the punch here. So he threw a punch a couple more times the guy I guess was afraid to hit me in the chest or something. Anyway When he was ready an did hit my chest then I started defending. When Intercepted his guards he felt his balance go. I told him to hit harder. Like he was trying to knock me over with his punch. When he did that i bil sau his arm. It must felt like a cut to his arm because then he switch up to the left. An then we had a little exchange. I showed him jum sau when he punch low. He was surprise that it stung his arm so much.


Also another time my Sihing and I were doing Chum Kiu. We were comparing Yip Man's CK to that of Yuen Kay San CK. anyway some young teens came by an asked does that stuff work. My Sihing said oh come on throw some punches. The big guy asked him if he was going to hit him back...He said no. So the guy threw his punches. My Sihing simply pak sau continously. The young guy didnt land a blow.

So these are realistic drills. Practice your techniques with different people. The best way to get random challenges is to practice at a park or somewhere public someone will eventually come over an start asking questions. An wonder if it really works.

We should try to practice realistic drills with one another an others. Try different things. For instance drill one...

1.Work on trapping. (Have your opponent fire punches at you while you attempt to trap and hit him).

2.Work on defense against kicks(Have your partner fire random hard kicks while you defend).

3.Work on accuracy and timing(Pick one place to hit your partner be it the left cheek or middle of the chest. While they throw punches and kicks at you hard).

4.Work on Deflecting hard attacks by defending and evading only.

These are realistic drills they hard and you don't know whats coming.

[Yoshiyahu]

Sustained arm contact is just ONE way to creat a bridge. A bridge is any structure that connects me to my opponent.



WCK's method is to control while striking. It is the control that provides our safety and sets up the striking. The notion that "once you establish proper range and facing, you should hit" won't stop himfrom hitting you back (and your opponent can change facing in a split second as he hits). Saying "WCK is a striking art" is to miss the most important aspect of WCK, the control. It's like saying that GNP is a "striking approach". Sure, but it is the control on the ground that makes GNP work Just like it is the control that makes WCK work.

D*** you Niehoff I hate when I have to agree with you...wow...you are so right...



Yeah, i just said that in my post above.




So your point is to control the person before you hit. That isn't any different from establishing proper range and facing, those are what give you the control.

That still doesn't mean that chi sao = grappling as you said before.

What is the meaning of grappling????

Also is all grappling done on the ground???

[anerlich]

Also is all grappling done on the ground???

I guess it could happen in mid-air (two guys fighting over a parachute, how's that for incentive?) or underwater. Usually on the ground, though.

You can grapple standing up, which is what I think you were alluding to.

[anerlich]

Realistic drills

Seldom has a post been more inappropriately titled. :rolleyes:

[duende]

No, I just don't care about the "HFY perspective" -- which I think is just piles of Garrett Gee's theory (the sh1t that it is) on top of TWC.


This is out of line Terrence and you know it. YOU want to back this statement up?? Come to San Francisco, and I will personally take you for a walk.

Don't think for one second you can hide behind all your other KF brother's achievements!

As for your TWC nonsense, it has not only been discussed and debated to death, but anyone who really cared about it would actually take the time to come see for themselves.

Like the multitudes of WC'rs from other schools who already have.

YOU on the other hand just talk SH1T. And hide from potential sparring partners and tell them instead to go train MUAY THAI.

Get real Terrence. Life is too short for this crap.

You hate HFY. We get it. Stop your beatchin, and frickin' put us on your ignore list already.




As for this thread. My opinion is that WC does contain stand-up grappling. As in Kum Na/Chi Na. But it's a grappling that is alive and flowing by utilizing what we refer to as CONTACT CONTROL, and not actual dead hand fully committed grappling.

This is the core difference between anti-grappling, and counter grappling.

For more info read:

http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2346

As for mixing in grappling with WC. I believe you can mix in whatever you like. Once you understand WC's core body mechanics, to varying degrees, any outside technique and applications can be incorporated successfully.

However I do not think I'd ever go to a WC school that is trying also to be a MMA school to learn Jiu Jitsu. I'd rather just go straight to the source and learn the real deal. But hey... that's just me.

[duende]

You forgot to include the rest of how this plays out. After you hit him in the face hard, he deals with getting hit and continues to grab your legs and slam you on your back, then force-feeds you some knuckle-sandwiches.

The whole strike-defense to a shoot is about the stupidest ****ing idea out there, unless the guy you're fighting is 120lb emo kid. This has been proven time and again in MMA. Hitting a guy shooting at you DOESNT STOP THEM. And fights aren't won by single strikes.

Exactly. This is what we call sharp shooting, and may work if the stars are aligned properly and you just happened to deliver one of your best most powerful punches ever etc...

However I do believe that Wing Chun has it's own equivalent of a "sprawl" type body mechanic. One that uses footwork positioning and range over fully committed leaning. Not to mention, the strike itself can be the bridge/point of contact.

[anerlich]

But it's a grappling that is alive and flowing by utilizing what we refer to as CONTACT CONTROL, and not actual dead hand fully committed grappling.


What do you mean by "dead hand" in this context? Is it like a "death grip", perhaps?

I read the HFY108 thread you quoted, there was some good though, not revolutionary or revelatory, thoughts presented there, but it didn't explain the distinction you make here.

I wouldn't describe wrestlers as necessarily having "dead hands", myself. And I've met no decent ones that aren't VERY "alive and flowing".

[duende]

What do you mean by "dead hand" in this context? Is it like a "death grip", perhaps?

I read the HFY108 thread you quoted, there was some good though, not revolutionary or revelatory, thoughts presented there, but it didn't explain the distinction you make here.

I wouldn't describe wrestlers as necessarily having "dead hands", myself. And I've met no decent ones that aren't VERY "alive and flowing".

Death Grip? Come on.. that's not up to par for the famous Anerlich wit. Or maybe it is. :rolleyes:

No. First off, dead hand is not an insult, And of course good wrestlers are alive and flowing. I'm talking about point of contact and how it is controlled. Meaning Contact Control .

Dead hand in this situation refers to the condition where your hand is fully committed solely to holding on to it's point of contact on your opponent.

Live hand means that you use your hand to control/limit direction of movement and space but do not commit it or "tie it down" to your opponents hand or point of contact. Like fully gripping with your fingers and thumb for example. Instead, live hand is kept free in motion. Thereby allowing it to still be free to slip (while maintaining contact and influencing) stick, or strike.


Admittedly, sometimes dead-hand is the only solution, however live hand is what is sought out.

[t_niehoff]

So your point is to control the person before you hit. That isn't any different from establishing proper range and facing, those are what give you the control.


"Proper range and facing" is NOT control. Controlling your opponent means he can't do anything productive except try to get out of your control. Being in position to strike, even to hit and not be hit (like being behind a person) isn't the same thing as being able to control that person. Controlling your opponent will give you the opportunity to hit, but being able to hit doesn't mean you have control.



That still doesn't mean that chi sao = grappling as you said before.

Grappling is being in contact and trying to physically manipulate your opponent to reach your objective. That's what wrestlers do, that's what judoka do, that's what sumo wrestlers do,and that's what we do in WCK -- except we add strikesto the mix. Chi sao is similar to a wreslter's handfighting.

[t_niehoff]

This is out of line Terrence and you know it. YOU want to back this statement up?? Come to San Francisco, and I will personally take you for a walk.


Oh, the deadly internet challenge! If I ever visit San Francisco and want to waste some time with anyone in HFY, it would be to stop by and play with Garrett.



Don't think for one second you can hide behind all your other KF brother's achievements!


I'm not hiding at all. I just want it clear that I don't give a rat's ass about the HFY perspective, and now you know why I don't. So you and all your fellow cultmembers can stop trying to share your fantasy perspectivewith me.



As for your TWC nonsense, it has not only been discussed and debated to death, but anyone who really cared about it would actually take the time to come see for themselves.


I did see for myself. I saw Garrett in person. But you are correct, that if anyone is interested they should go and see for themselves. However, I can't begin to imagine why anyone except someone seeking fantasy would be interested to see for themselves.



Like the multitudes of WC'rs from other schools who already have.


Which proves what? That there are lots of suckers out there? That there arelots of gullible people? That some people want to believe comic book martial art fantasies? OK, I concede the point.



YOU on the other hand just talk SH1T. And hide from potential sparring partners and tell them instead to go train MUAY THAI.

Get real Terrence. Life is too short for this crap.

You hate HFY. We get it. Stop your beatchin, and frickin' put us on your ignore list already.


I don't hate HFY, I just think there is a lot of things wrong with WCK and TCMA as a whole. And I think Garrett has taken everything that is wrong and put it into his "system".

I'll gladly ignore you. Don't respond to my posts and I'll ignore you. I don't want anything to do with your unhealthy group. But when you fellows enter into I conversastion I'm having, I won't ignore you.



As for this thread. My opinion is that WC does contain stand-up grappling. As in Kum Na/Chi Na. But it's a grappling that is alive and flowing by utilizing what we refer to as CONTACT CONTROL, and not actual dead hand fully committed grappling.

This is the core difference between anti-grappling, and counter grappling.

For more info read:

http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2346

As for mixing in grappling with WC. I believe you can mix in whatever you like. Once you understand WC's core body mechanics, to varying degrees, any outside technique and applications can be incorporated successfully.

However I do not think I'd ever go to a WC school that is trying also to be a MMA school to learn Jiu Jitsu. I'd rather just go straight to the source and learn the real deal. But hey... that's just me.

"Go to the source and learn from the real deal." LOL! You guys are straight out of a comic book.

[m1k3]

Death Grip? Come on.. that's not up to par for the famous Anerlich wit. Or maybe it is. :rolleyes:

No. First off, dead hand is not an insult, And of course good wrestlers are alive and flowing. I'm talking about point of contact and how it is controlled. Meaning Contact Control .

Dead hand in this situation refers to the condition where your hand is fully committed solely to holding on to it's point of contact on your opponent.

Live hand means that you use your hand to control/limit direction of movement and space but do not commit it or "tie it down" to your opponents hand or point of contact. Like fully gripping with your fingers and thumb for example. Instead, live hand is kept free in motion. Thereby allowing it to still be free to slip (while maintaining contact and influencing) stick, or strike.


Admittedly, sometimes dead-hand is the only solution, however live hand is what is sought out.

A good grappler doesn't "dead hand", ever. If you know anything about hand and grip fighting you would know that your grips are a bridge to off balancing, a take down or a throw, they are not an end in and of themselves.

Even in MT the clinch is a bridge to a wide variety of strikes and will be abandoned the moment it is no longer an advantage.

To hang on to a grip or a clinch when it is not working is the sign of a beginner.

[duende]

Oh, the deadly internet challenge! If I ever visit San Francisco and want to waste some time with anyone in HFY, it would be to stop by and play with Garrett.

Now you truly are delusional.

I'll back up everything I write here. That's just one difference among many between us apparently.



I'm not hiding at all. I just want it clear that I don't give a rat's ass about the HFY perspective, and now you know why I don't. So you and all your fellow cultmembers can stop trying to share your fantasy perspectivewith me.


This is a forum Terence. And as such, if you have a problem with any of my KF brother's, then take your issue up with them directly. Is that so hard for you to understand??



I did see for myself. I saw Garrett in person. But you are correct, that if anyone is interested they should go and see for themselves. However, I can't begin to imagine why anyone except someone seeking fantasy would be interested to see for themselves.


See for yourself?? Ha that is funny. Sitting off to the side on, too chicken-sh1t to touch hands with anybody. Yeah.... your a real poster boy for hands-on experience. :rolleyes:




Which proves what? That there are lots of suckers out there? That there arelots of gullible people? That some people want to believe comic book martial art fantasies? OK, I concede the point.


You want to make us the target for all your own insecurities, then that is your own problem. Again. Keep your insults directed at the person who you are in conflict with.

Do not involve my Sifu or school, or else I am going to call you out for the punk that you are.




I don't hate HFY, I just think there is a lot of things wrong with WCK and TCMA as a whole. And I think Garrett has taken everything that is wrong and put it into his "system".


Again. Cheap talk from a toothless tiger. Grow up.



I'll gladly ignore you. Don't respond to my posts and I'll ignore you. I don't want anything to do with your unhealthy group. But when you fellows enter into I conversastion I'm having, I won't ignore you.


I do ignore you Terence. But when you make comments that are out of line, I only ask that you back them in the real world.

For someone who talks so much about "reality testing" this and " real fighting" that... You are a nothing more than best example of everything you rant against.





"Go to the source and learn from the real deal." LOL! You guys are straight out of a comic book.

See... perfect example. You still don't know who your target is. You disagree with MY statement, then address me directly. Not "you guys".

How old are you? Seriously.

[Hendrik]

BTW dumb a$$, I was talking about a lap sau technique, not some "lop sau excersize". That's why I used the word 'technique'. Didn't they teach you to read in law school?

Maybe you need those Hooked on Phonics books like your friend Hendrik..




what is the point to drag me into this? is this the type of anti -qing righteousness you learn?

[duende]

A good grappler doesn't "dead hand", ever. If you know anything about hand and grip fighting you would know that your grips are a bridge to off balancing, a take down or a throw, they are not an end in and of themselves.

Even in MT the clinch is a bridge to a wide variety of strikes and will be abandoned the moment it is no longer an advantage.

To hang on to a grip or a clinch when it is not working is the sign of a beginner.

You have completely failed to understand my point. And instead have made some very obvious statements that have nothing to do with my post.

Read my post again. With live hand "contact control" one can influence and limited an opponent's movement while AT THE SAME TIME having his hand free to move to better positioning, strike, etc.

[duende]

what is the point to drag me into this? is this the type of anti -qing righteousness you learn?

Hendrik... for once, I will agree with you. :D

[m1k3]

You have completely failed to understand my point. And instead have made some very obvious statements that have nothing to do with my post.

Read my post again. With live hand "contact control" one can influence and limited an opponent's movement while AT THE SAME TIME having his hand free to move to better positioning, strike, etc.

I understand what you mean with live hand. I'm not sure what you mean with dead hand. Please explain it a little differently to me. I was kind of like anerlich and thought you meant that dead head was like a death grip, hang on at all costs.

I was pointing out that good grapplers don't dead hand even if the thumb is wrapped around for the grip.

If you mean something different please explain. :confused:

[JPinAZ]

This is a forum Terence. And as such, if you have a problem with any of my KF brother's, then take your issue up with them directly. Is that so hard for you to understand??


I have no issue with that. I will be in SL in 3 weeks for work. I'd be more than happy to go look T up and he can show me how 'wrong' I am in my thinking ;)
He has a standing invite for anyone in town to come train with him right? I'm cool with that, he doesn't have to travel anywhere. Not a challenge, just accepting the open invite..

Of course, I'd probably have to go take a few years MT first like the other guy that lives there and took T up on his 'open invite' :eek:

Or maybe he would act like he does at seminars and just sit in the corner afraid to touch hands..

Or maybe he'd whine something about not being interested after all...

Or maybe he'd say 'no, but you can meet me in LA when I'm there so my brothers that actually can fight can back me up'.. :rolleyes:

Sorry for sidelining the thread. I was trying to keep my posts on-subject before T got his panties wadded up and tried his silly attempt to make it personal. I'll PM T so we can talk about maybe meeting up when I'm in SL and take this off the forums.

Jonathan

[JPinAZ]

what is the point to drag me into this? is this the type of anti -qing righteousness you learn?

My bad, was a low blow.

BTW, I am not anti-qing. I live in America and have no personal involvment with Chinese politics, past or present. But it's interesting studies none-the-less!

[duende]

I have no issue with that. I will be in SL in 3 weeks for work. I'd be more than happy to go look T up and he can show me how 'wrong' I am in my thinking ;)
He has a standing invite for anyone in town to come train with him right? I'm cool with that, he doesn't have to travel anywhere. Not a challenge, just accepting the open invite..

Of course, I'd probably have to go take a few years MT first like the other guy that lives there and took T up on his 'open invite' :eek:

Or maybe he would act like he does at seminars and just sit in the corner afraid to touch hands..

Or maybe he'd whine something about not being interested after all...

Or maybe he'd say 'no, but you can meet me in LA when I'm there so my brothers that actually can fight can back me up'.. :rolleyes:

Sorry for sidelining the thread. I was trying to keep my posts on-subject before T got his panties wadded up and tried his silly attempt to make it personal. I'll PM T so we can talk about maybe meeting up when I'm in SL and take this off the forums.

Jonathan

My apologies for sidelining the thread too.

I just feel that people should have healthy dialog, and be able to disagree amongst themselves without bringing insults of each other's family and teachers into the picture. That is lame.

Speak for yourself. Represent yourself. It's that simple.

[duende]

I understand what you mean with live hand. I'm not sure what you mean with dead hand. Please explain it a little differently to me. I was kind of like anerlich and thought you meant that dead head was like a death grip, hang on at all costs.

I was pointing out that good grapplers don't dead hand even if the thumb is wrapped around for the grip.

If you mean something different please explain. :confused:

No prob. And no it does not mean "hang on at all costs". It is not an insult by anymeans, just a description of a different kind of contact control.

Dead hand in this context simply means the hand is committed solely to one action at one given moment... not that it is stagnant or anything like that, only that it is dedicated to one function at one point in time.

Therefore it is less able to serve two purposes, like limit motion while gaining positioning at one time. Or "kill two birds with one stone" if you will.

[duende]

So your point is to control the person before you hit. That isn't any different from establishing proper range and facing, those are what give you the control.

That still doesn't mean that chi sao = grappling as you said before.

I think the misunderstanding here is simply semantics, timeframes, and a miss-connect due to what is typically seen as "grappling".


Anytime you impair, limit, or control someone's movement that can be considered a form of grappling.

As Chi Sao does this, imo, it therefore can be considered a form of stand-up grappling.

[Hendrik]

Hendrik... for once, I will agree with you. :D

sick and off focus minded people isnt it?

[duende]

People just get carried away in the heat of the argument.

We all make mistakes from time to time.

[Hendrik]

People just get carried away in the heat of the argument.

We all make mistakes from time to time.

OK. accept.

[vingtsunplaya]

I suppose I didn’t really have enough time to commit on my last post so it came off a bit shorter and abbreviated than I would have liked. What I was eluding too was exactly what duende was talking about: you don’t have to play a “grappler’s game” just because he can take a hit and take you to the ground. If you establish your own boundaries and defend yourself properly, the jerky should never be able to even put his hands (or feet) on you to take you down. I am not hoping/ praying for a 1 punch kill or anything. More to the point I am hoping to achieve proper control of my opponent so that I can continue to bash his face in whilst he tries to grab a leg/arm/head/ whatever. If I don’t achieve the proper range control, there are other things which can still be done to pull my @$$ out of the fire, but they are emergency tactics and aren’t ideal. When I said “hit him in the face,” that is exactly the first thing I would do though. If he gets that close to me that we are going to the ground, he will certainly pay for the attempt.

Also, I hear a lot of people talking about MMA fights on here and referring to them as “the real deal.” They are far from that. The rule books for those fights look like phone books, and the things you are allowed to do/ not allowed to do have reduced it to a strange form of gay porn. Not to say I don’t think those guys can’t fight or aren’t great athletes; not at all. I certainly wouldn’t pick a fight with any one of them just for sh1ts and giggles. BUT, were I to fight with one, I would certainly not hesitate to rip his ******* ear off, stick my thumb in his eye, or bite a finger in half if it were to save me. THAT is called phu q fu. That is reality. MMA is far from that…

As for all the name-calling, and calling out of people’s teacher’s etc.: While it is impressive to watch a man be completely controlled by his emotions, it is, never-the-less, a waste of time. Again, I agree with duende: represent yourself and what you know, leave all the other bull-****** out of it. Nobody is impressed by insults. Oh, and please, please, please start using a dictionary and/ or a proper translator. Some of these posts are darn-near impossible to struggle through… If you can’t speak English well, perhaps this is not the forum for you… :)

[AdrianK]

If you establish your own boundaries and defend yourself properly, the jerky should never be able to even put his hands (or feet) on you to take you down. I am not hoping/ praying for a 1 punch kill or anything. More to the point I am hoping to achieve proper control of my opponent so that I can continue to bash his face in whilst he tries to grab a leg/arm/head/ whatever.

The thing is, its far easier for someone to take you down than it is for you to defend being taken to the ground.. It also takes far less time to get good at it.

Anyways, the point is you cant ignore the ground game. You cant ever believe you will be able to control where a fight goes. You only need to make sure you have options in as many places as it can go, to be best prepared. Outside in the real world, where you have to deal with things like rain, heavy winds, mud, concreate, walls, your opponents friends, weapons, etc. etc., you can't ever believe you can have control over where the fight goes. The idea that you can have enough control to make sure it doesn't go to the ground is simply an excuse for not training what they do.

And its a common one I hear in many martial arts schools to justify an instructors lack of knowledge of the subject.

And it is utterly ridiculous to think this way. It only limits yourself.



Also, I hear a lot of people talking about MMA fights on here and referring to them as “the real deal.” They are far from that. The rule books for those fights look like phone books, and the things you are allowed to do/ not allowed to do have reduced it to a strange form of gay porn. Not to say I don’t think those guys can’t fight or aren’t great athletes; not at all. I certainly wouldn’t pick a fight with any one of them just for sh1ts and giggles. BUT, were I to fight with one, I would certainly not hesitate to rip his ******* ear off, stick my thumb in his eye, or bite a finger in half if it were to save me. THAT is called phu q fu. That is reality. MMA is far from that…

For all the people who think MMA is 100% the real deal, there are just as many people who severely undervalue its importance to gauging realism.

Yes, MMA has an extreme amount of rules to protect its athletes. This is true. But don't fool yourself. Its as real as it gets, and don't think that just because you can't poke someones eyes or rip off their ear, that its not like a real fight.

You're looking at it the wrong way. You see two guys on the ground and think, well if he took me down I'll just poke out his eyes. But thats not how it is, it isn't like poking out someones eyes or ripping off their ear is some kind of secret kung fu technique.. Literally EVERYONE knows how to do it. So when you're on the ground, its two guys able to do the same things to eachother, but ONE guy, the guy who has more ground game experience, has positional dominance. And when you have the dominant position, you have an extreme advantage to being able to do anything you'd like, as well as preventing your opponent from doing anything.

Its really hard to rip someones ear off, when you're on your back with a 200lb guy on top of your chest.

You need to seriously take a look at the advantages of having a ground game, and instead of writing MMA off like so many pajama sifus do, appreciate it for the things it DOES show us. Which are an incredible amount of truths about the martial arts.

[Hendrik]

seriusly, until one knows what is WCK how can one mixing this and that?

and also, knowing how to kick, doing Tan Bong Fok.... do some chi sau drill.... do some form set or doing some San Sau doesnt mean one have enter the door of WCK train.


Look at the famous fast accelerate jin of WCK it is no longer here. So why is it if everyone doing WCK that the famous WCK tool is gone?

Similar to one can mimic a four wheel drive car however when the engine and the platform is no longer four wheel drive but motorcycle engine and platform it has become not effective vehicle at all.

adding more decoration is only going to drag down that motorcycle engine and platform. one might as well totally abandon the motorcycle engine and platform and started it fresh without burden.


What is the point to hang on half dead art and keep adding mixing something but infact one is doing other art already?

what is the point of this so called mixing? bottom line is just for title saving, face saving, autority saving.....etc took those out no point to hang on to WCK.

[m1k3]

VTPlaya, think of it this way, in football or rugby the ball carrier thinks, I won't let them tackle me, I will use my skills to prevent them from being able to do that.

Sometimes it works, no one can bring them down, but that isn't very often at all, sometimes they can get a tackler or even several to miss, but they still end up hitting the ground and a lot of times the first tackler brings them down.

And this is someone who's primary job is to avoid being tackled and has other people running interference for him.

So, ho well do you think you are going to do against someone who wants to get you on the ground? :rolleyes:

[m1k3]

Hendrick, thank you for whatever it was you just posted. It added just what was missing to this conversation, gibberish. :D

[Hendrik]

The thing is, its far easier for someone to take you down than it is for you to defend being taken to the ground.. It also takes far less time to get good at it.

.



That is what your opponent and you may be want to believe. and it is just a believe.



What is the reality?

one doesnt know or not good enough on what one is doing so others defeat one.

the defeat could be while standing, jumping, falling.....etc. not fix.




But if you already believe one thing then your are subject to the influence of your believe.


Until one can differentiate between BELIEVE and REALITY one is always just a follower and keep learning to defend tiredly and constantly in the state of short coming. no salvation but keep becomes others slave.





nope not all Dracula win if you dont believe so


have some gut to face the reality be it Mas Oyama or Graces or Count Dracula.
Be a Van Helsing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrOqCgDgXfQ&feature=related





answer your self a question, what is the art you practice and good at? if you are a warewolf dont be a Vampire. If you are a Vampire Dont be a warewolf. if you are a vampire be a vampire and fly. if you are a warewolf be a warewolf.....

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


That simple.

[t_niehoff]

I have no issue with that. I will be in SL in 3 weeks for work. I'd be more than happy to go look T up and he can show me how 'wrong' I am in my thinking ;)
He has a standing invite for anyone in town to come train with him right? I'm cool with that, he doesn't have to travel anywhere. Not a challenge, just accepting the open invite..

Of course, I'd probably have to go take a few years MT first like the other guy that lives there and took T up on his 'open invite' :eek:

Or maybe he would act like he does at seminars and just sit in the corner afraid to touch hands..

Or maybe he'd whine something about not being interested after all...

Or maybe he'd say 'no, but you can meet me in LA when I'm there so my brothers that actually can fight can back me up'.. :rolleyes:

Sorry for sidelining the thread. I was trying to keep my posts on-subject before T got his panties wadded up and tried his silly attempt to make it personal. I'll PM T so we can talk about maybe meeting up when I'm in SL and take this off the forums.

Jonathan

I PM'ed you my cell number, call me when you get into town. I'll be more than happy to SHOW you why HFY is nonsense.

I'm not making this thread personal. I didn't say anything personal about YOU. I am saying it about your views (the HFY view). Do you understand the difference? Saying that your views are theoretical nonsense and not to be taken seriously isn't a personal attack; suggesting that I am a coward IS a personal attack.

But, we'll sort this out when we meet. :)

[AdrianK]

That is what your opponent and you may be want to believe. and it is just a believe.



What is the reality?

one doesnt know or not good enough on what one is doing so others defeat one.

the defeat could be while standing, jumping, falling.....etc. not fix.




But if you already believe one thing then your are subject to the influence of your believe.


Until one can differentiate between BELIEVE and REALITY one is always just a follower and keep learning to defend tiredly and constantly in the state of short coming. no salvation but keep becomes others slave.





nope not all Dracula win if you dont believe so


have some gut to face the reality be it Mas Oyama or Graces or Count Dracula.
Be a Van Helsing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrOqCgDgXfQ&feature=related

Oooh Hendrik. :rolleyes:

[Hendrik]

Oooh Hendrik. :rolleyes:

sure, dont you know my idol is Van Helsing? going after the Un dead needs lots of guts, taking risk, and hard work isnt it?

[t_niehoff]

sure, dont you know my idol is Van Helsing? going after the Un dead needs lots of guts, taking risk, and hard work isnt it?

Ah, yeah, going after the undead is a lot like developing internal power, yin/yang, chi, etc.

[Hendrik]

Ah, yeah, going after the undead is a lot like developing internal power, yin/yang, chi, etc.



That is not your concern because it is not your weapon.


believe it or not your take down will be difficult if the type of training were introduced back to the WCner today.

believe it or not your chance to get knock out while you are standing will be much higher here on if the type of training were introduce back to WCner today.

so, yes, there become a time of fair 50/50 take down or knock out chance. then, there is where the real fun begin. because there is no more MANTRA to protect you. hahahaha.

[t_niehoff]

That is not your concern because it is not your weapon.

Very true, since I am not concerned with killing the undead, I don't need the weapons like yin/yang, chi,internal power, etc. to kill them.

[Hendrik]

Very true, since I am not concerned with killing the undead, I don't need the weapons like yin/yang, chi,internal power, etc. to kill them.

even if you concern there is nothing you can do about it and it is best to let you blind on the weapon. hahahaha

[t_niehoff]

even if you concern there is nothing you can do about it and it is best to let you blind on the weapon. hahahaha

Well, in any event, it's nice to know that if I ever do need to fight the undead or any other fantasy creature, that you have the fantasy weapons that I'll need.

[JPinAZ]

I'm sorry I ever mentioned Hedrik's in this thread... Now we have the extreme pleasure of reading his incoherant ramblings about lord knows what on yet another thread.

WTF is he even talking about?? :eek::confused::rolleyes:

[m1k3]

I'm sorry I ever mentioned Hedrik's in this thread... Now we have the extreme pleasure of reading his incoherant ramblings about lord knows what on yet another thread.

WTF is he even talking about?? :eek::confused::rolleyes:

Hendrick has be quoting his favorite movie, "Kung Fu Panda". It's one of my favorites also. The only problem is that he believes it.

"There is no secret ingredient." Po, the dragon warrior. :D

[Hendrik]

Hendrick has be quoting his favorite movie, "Kung Fu Panda". It's one of my favorites also. The only problem is that he believes it.

"There is no secret ingredient." Po, the dragon warrior. :D



have some gut and have some real kung fu instead of all the talk and could even defend SLT from Terence post.

[Hendrik]

I'm sorry I ever mentioned Hedrik's in this thread... Now we have the extreme pleasure of reading his incoherant ramblings about lord knows what on yet another thread.

WTF is he even talking about?? :eek::confused::rolleyes:


Ok to not have a F*()King clue with an air head. :D

[duende]

I PM'ed you my cell number, call me when you get into town. I'll be more than happy to SHOW you why HFY is nonsense.

I'm not making this thread personal. I didn't say anything personal about YOU. I am saying it about your views (the HFY view). Do you understand the difference? Saying that your views are theoretical nonsense and not to be taken seriously isn't a personal attack; suggesting that I am a coward IS a personal attack.

But, we'll sort this out when we meet. :)

What a load of back-tracking horse Sh1t! You most certainly did make this thread personal. Seriously... do you honestly expect people to buy that load of crap you just wrote?

Talk about theoretical nonsense! That sh1t might fly in the courtroom, but try telling that to someone on the street who's about to kick your ass.


Terence: I wasn't talking about you or insulting you, I was just saying it about your views. :rolleyes:

Yeah... that'll go over real well.

Believe it or not Terence, You are not the only one in the whole WC community that questions things. You are not the only person who challenges what he is taught. And you most certainly are not the only person who test's what he's learned with real resisting opponents.

I know you find that hard to believe, but get over yourself.

[t_niehoff]

What a load of back-tracking horse Sh1t! You most certainly did make this thread personal. Seriously... do you honestly expect people to buy that load of crap you just wrote?

Talk about theoretical nonsense! That sh1t might fly in the courtroom, but try telling that to someone on the street who's about to kick your ass.


Terence: I wasn't talking about you or insulting you, I was just saying it about your views. :rolleyes:

Yeah... that'll go over real well.


Personal is to call you an idiot. To say that what you believe is silly is not personal. You can understand that?

But, let me be as clear as I can be since you seem to want to continue the coversation. I think HFY is silly, it is piles of theoretical sh1t set onto TWC and topped with a history right out of a comic book. It amazes me that anyone falls for it. But then again, PT Barnum knew what he was talking about.

So, I don't take the HFY perspective seriously, it is a joke.

I'm not going to seek out HFY people and if you leave me alone and don't try to enter into conversations I'm having, particularly by quoting me, to offer a HFY perspective, then you won't hearfrom me about HFY. BUT, realize that anytime you bring me into a converstaion (likeby quoting me), then I'll respond, and my response will be to say that I don't take HFY seriously, that it is a joke.

Don't want to hear that? Then stay away from me.



Believe it or not Terence, You are not the only one in the whole WC community that questions things. You are not the only person who challenges what he is taught. And you most certainly are not the only person who test's what he's learned with real resisting opponents.

I know you find that hard to believe, but get over yourself.

I know that I'm not the only one. There are some on this forum. On the other hand, every cultmember in the world believes he's not a cultmember. Every woo believes he has questioned things through. Don't try and suggest that HFY practitioners are critical thinkers who get out and regularly spar with competent fighters. If you guys were, you wouldn't be spewing the nutty stuff that you do.

[duende]

Then I'll be real clear too Terence,

You don't have the slightest idea of what is a joke and what is not a joke in the real world.

And for that I almost feel sorry for you.

Keep on posting your trash talk. When you want to experience life, you know where to find me.

[t_niehoff]

Then I'll be real clear too Terence,

You don't have the slightest idea of what is a joke and what is not a joke in the real world.

And for that I almost feel sorry for you.

Keep on posting your trash talk. When you want to experience life, you know where to find me.

Spoken like a true cultmember.

[duende]

Spoken like a true cultmember.

Is that also not an insult?

Or are you going to cowardly back-track out of that one too?

As for theoretical nonsense.

Tell me then, why did your Sifu Robert Chu use our HFY terminology for his article on Bai Jong, Jit Kiu, Chum Kiu, and Wu Ma??? Because he knew real information when he saw it!

Why did he release articles that for all intents and purposes echo previously released articles by us? Articles on the Wing Chun Punch, and on Wing Chun Footwork.

Because regardless of whether or not he knew about the HFY articles, he views these WC topics similarly.

Guess our non-sense must be your non-sense too!


Now here in this thread you talk about Chi Sau being a form of stand-up grappling that can be used for fighting at a clinch range.

This is what I've been saying for frickin years! That Chi Sau is for fighting at a certain time-frame. When for years upon years YOU said it was only a training drill.

So Terence, if I'm a cult member, then you are a wannabe cult-member kissing my a$$ so that you can join.

I'm done with this thread. Keep on strokin' yourself. I've got better things to do.

[t_niehoff]

Is that also not an insult?

Or are you going to cowardly back-track out of that one too?


HFY is a cult.



As for theoretical nonsense.

Tell me then, why did your Sifu Robert Chu use our HFY terminology for his article on Bai Jong, Jit Kiu, Chum Kiu, and Wu Ma??? Because he knew real information when he saw it!


It might surprise you to learn that some of "HFY terminology" isn't original -- that is was taken, like its forms, from other sources. So your terminology isn't exclusive to HFY. Bai jong, chum kiu wu ma, etc. were terms I knew 25 years ago, before I met Robert. Interestingly, I also learned the HFY forms (TWC forms) long ago too.



Why did he release articles that for all intents and purposes echo previously released articles by us? Articles on the Wing Chun Punch, and on Wing Chun Footwork.


What articles did HFY release that pre-dated his articles? Oh, BTW, Benny's punch article -- funny that, considering that Benny took a private lesson from Robert prior to writing that article and joining HFY, and he learned one point in Gu Lao, the punch.



Because regardless of whether or not he knew about the HFY articles, he views these WC topics similarly.

Guess our non-sense must be your non-sense too!


What you fail to point out is all the other piles of rubbish heaped onto the few things from legitimate WCK, your WCK formula, the gates, time/space/energy, saam mor kiu, and the list goes on and on.

FWIW, Robert's motto is "let application be your sifu" -- that is a rejection of theory. Theory doesn't teach you to apply your WCK. Experience fighting does.

Fighting isn't -- and CAN'T be -- that complicated. And that's why when you look at functional martial arts, you see they keep theory to a minimum.



Now here in this thread you talk about Chi Sau being a form of stand-up grappling that can be used for fighting at a clinch range.

This is what I've been saying for frickin years! That Chi Sau is for fighting at a certain time-frame. When for years upon years YOU said it was only a training drill.


Well, you've been wrong for years, because we're not saying the same things at all. And you don't understand what I've been saying. Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.

Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.



So Terence, if I'm a cult member, then you are a wannabe cult-member kissing my a$$ so that you can join.

I'm done with this thread. Keep on strokin' yourself. I've got better things to do.

LOL! Dude, I recognized Benny and Garrett for what they were the minute I laid eyes on them back in '99. Two peas in a pod.

[duende]

HFY is a cult.


The opinion of a back-peddling hypocritical a$$. Keep on editing your posts btw...



It might surprise you to learn that some of "HFY terminology" isn't original -- that is was taken, like its forms, from other sources. So your terminology isn't exclusive to HFY. Bai jong, chum kiu wu ma, etc. were terms I knew 25 years ago, before I met Robert. Interestingly, I also learned the HFY forms (TWC forms) long ago too.


The context and the usage of the term in the manner that I'm referring to WAS at the time unique to HFY. As for anything you learned in 1993?? Big fricken deal. I have Sihings who learned HFY from my Sifu all the way back to 1977. Before TWC was even known in the USA.

and you're on crack if you think you learned our forms.



What articles did HFY release that pre-dated his articles? Oh, BTW, Benny's punch article -- funny that, considering that Benny took a private lesson from Robert prior to writing that article and joining HFY, and he learned one point in Gu Lao, the punch.


Gu Lao punch?? Really??? Now that is funny.

Go look a true Gu Lao punch. And then feel free to come back here and re-edit your post. Because this is silliest thing you've written yet.




What you fail to point out is all the other piles of rubbish heaped onto the few things from legitimate WCK, your WCK formula, the gates, time/space/energy, saam mor kiu, and the list goes on and on.


Sad for you that you consider this a pile of rubbish. Truly shows what an ignorant fool you are.



FWIW, Robert's motto is "let application be your sifu" -- that is a rejection of theory. Theory doesn't teach you to apply your WCK. Experience fighting does.


Yes, we've heard you say this a million times. Appears it is the ONLY thing you learned from Robert which is too bad.



Fighting isn't -- and CAN'T be -- that complicated. And that's why when you look at functional martial arts, you see they keep theory to a minimum.


more so-called wisdom from a poser.




Well, you've been wrong for years, because we're not saying the same things at all. And you don't understand what I've been saying. Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.

Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.


More hypocracy and back-peddling. I'm sure you'll re-edit your prior posts to conform to this last paragraph too.



LOL! Dude, I recognized Benny and Garrett for what they were the minute I laid eyes on them back in '99. Two peas in a pod.

What other great wisdom did you learn from sitting on the sidelines and not will touching anyone's hand??

Truly sorry for re-joining this thread. Will leave if Terence is done talking smack.

[TAYLOR1]

Terrence,

Who are you? Your nobody. You don’t know HFY. You sit in your little chair hiding behind your keyboard.

You want to test your skill? Come test it in Phoenix, you arrogant little sh1t!

Btw, why do you constantly edit your posts? You can’t keep your nutty thoughts straight? Or do you constantly change your mind because you don’t know what your talking about? The truth doesn’t change but your words do!

[JPinAZ]

Disclaimer: this is not a reply directed toward T, so he doesn't need to apply. :p

Last post:

Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.

Previous post:

WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

Another previous one:

Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last post:

Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.


Again:

Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
Sounds like fighting to me...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
But then:

Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

But wait, that's not right either:

Grappling is being in contact and trying to physically manipulate your opponent to reach your objective. That's what wrestlers do, that's what judoka do, that's what sumo wrestlers do,and that's what we do in WCK -- except we add strikesto the mix. Chi sao is similar to a wreslter's handfighting.

and lastly again:

Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling."
Which is it, is it grappling and striking (fighting), or is it an excersize? Is it wrestler's handfighting or is it a useless unrealistic excersize?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
oh wait, one more time:

Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
and
Previous post:

Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

Or, was it

...it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

Is it an excersize that teaches useful fighting skills or unrealistic excersize?
Is it grappling or isn't it?
Is it for fighting or isn't it?
No wonder there's confusion... :confused::rolleyes:

[vingtsunplaya]

Ok, I'm going to say it one more time, but this time I'll say it DIRECTLY to the person to whom it applies: Hendrick, please don't waste space/time here with your posts unless you actually have something a) coherent b) on topic and finally c) in proper English. It really pi$$es us all off when we have to wade through your sh1t postings. Van Helsing? Really? Dracula, werewolves? Come on bro. We are talking about reality here. By the way, shall we start a thread about fighting while flying throught the air (like in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon)?!?! That would apply to this conversation about as much as all that other sh1t.

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$.:rolleyes: Best of luck to you bro...

[Ned]

Disclaimer: this is not a reply directed toward T, so he doesn't need to apply. :p

Last post:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.


Previous post:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.


Another previous one:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last post:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.


Again:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.


Sounds like fighting to me...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
But then:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.


But wait, that's not right either:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Grappling is being in contact and trying to physically manipulate your opponent to reach your objective. That's what wrestlers do, that's what judoka do, that's what sumo wrestlers do,and that's what we do in WCK -- except we add strikesto the mix. Chi sao is similar to a wreslter's handfighting.


and lastly again:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling."


Which is it, is it grappling and striking (fighting), or is it an excersize? Is it wrestler's handfighting or is it a useless unrealistic excersize?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
oh wait, one more time:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.


and
Previous post:


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.


Or, was it


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
...it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.


Is it an excersize that teaches useful fighting skills or unrealistic excersize?
Is it grappling or isn't it?
Is it for fighting or isn't it?
No wonder there's confusion... :confused::rolleyes:

yeah.. spoken like an out of work St. L. lawyer with plenty of time to self-contridcit and blow!:rolleyes:

[Mr Punch]

Ok, ... Best of luck to you bro...Great Playa, bro. Another munchkin to tell us how it is. What were you saying about on topic?

[Mr Punch]

Last post:


Previous post:


Another previous one:
I'm not joining the debate: and I like T's views (it was his posting style that always ****ed me off)... but anyway, JPinAz: that post was ****ing hilarious! :D :D :D

[Hendrik]

You dont have to read my post right? ignore it if my music is not fitting you. Thanks



Ok, I'm going to say it one more time, but this time I'll say it DIRECTLY to the person to whom it applies: Hendrick, please don't waste space/time here with your posts unless you actually have something a) coherent b) on topic and finally c) in proper English. It really pi$$es us all off when we have to wade through your sh1t postings. Van Helsing? Really? Dracula, werewolves? Come on bro. We are talking about reality here. By the way, shall we start a thread about fighting while flying throught the air (like in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon)?!?! That would apply to this conversation about as much as all that other sh1t.

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$.:rolleyes: Best of luck to you bro...

[anerlich]

No. First off, dead hand is not an insult, And of course good wrestlers are alive and flowing. I'm talking about point of contact and how it is controlled. Meaning Contact Control .

Dead hand in this situation refers to the condition where your hand is fully committed solely to holding on to it's point of contact on your opponent.

OK, I figured that was what you meant.

I don't accept that "live hand" is the sole province of WC, HFY or otherwise. Or that wrestlers can't do it and don't do it.

Frankly, I don't see the point of taking something like Contact Control (caps are yours, not mine), which is something fairly common to many MA styles, and treating it as something profound that the "uninitiated" can't grasp.

Same with "antigrappling" and "countergrappling". Just definitions for what a pure striker might do against a grappler, and what a grappler might do. Artificial and pointless distinction for someone who does both and is more concerned with effectiveness than semantics.

One of my frustrations with TCMA is that people latch onto fairly pedestrian concepts and inflate their importance to the point where they feel they should be inscribed on the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus ,and assume because their Sifu told it to them that no one else has heard of it, when it's often close to the bleeding obvious.

Yeah, good call to whoever brought Hendrik onto this thread :rolleyes: and even better, allowing his spat with T to migrate here like cancer through the bloodstream of an afflicted patient.

[anerlich]

that post was ****ing hilarious!

I take it back. That post was worth putting up with both Hendrik and T.

T likes arguing so much, he's compelled to do it with himself as well as the rest.

[anerlich]

sure, dont you know my idol is Van Helsing? going after the Un dead needs lots of guts, taking risk, and hard work isnt it?

Just as well it's Undead, not Brain Dead, otherwise you'd be the hunted, not the hunter.

[Ultimatewingchun]

OK, I figured that was what you meant.

I don't accept that "live hand" is the sole province of WC, HFY or otherwise. Or that wrestlers can't do it and don't do it.

Frankly, I don't see the point of taking something like Contact Control (caps are yours, not mine), which is something fairly common to many MA styles, and treating it as something profound that the "uninitiated" can't grasp.

Same with "antigrappling" and "countergrappling". Just definitions for what a pure striker might do against a grappler, and what a grappler might do. Artificial and pointless distinction for someone who does both and is more concerned with effectiveness than semantics.

One of my frustrations with TCMA is that people latch onto fairly pedestrian concepts and inflate their importance to the point where they feel they should be inscribed on the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus ,and assume because their Sifu told it to them that no one else has heard of it, when it's often close to the bleeding obvious.

Yeah, good call to whoever brought Hendrik onto this thread :rolleyes: and even better, allowing his spat with T to migrate here like cancer through the bloodstream of an afflicted patient.


***THIS THREAD has become hilarious. And the remark about the "Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus" just blew me away !!! :eek::cool:;):D

[t_niehoff]

I guess when your head is filled with theoretical nonsense, you can't really grasp simple things.

When you do chi sao you are grappling but it is not some "form of grappling." There isn't such a thing as a "form of grapplnig" anymore than there is a "form of striking". You are either grappling, striking, or combining them (when you hold and hit, for example). Yes, Virginia, chi sao is grappling.

And chi sao, the exercise/drill, isn't training you to fight, As it is an unrealistic drill/exercise - as it is not done under realistic conditions- you can't develop fighting skills by doing it. You can LEARN to perform actions (grappling with striking thrown in), but since your partner isn't fighting you, you can't learn how to do those actionsin fighting. You are only learning how to do them in chi sao. Yes, Virginia, chi sai is an unrealsitic exercise.

So, chi sao is grappling, but it is grappling performed in an unrealsitic, artifical way. Yes, Virginia, chi sao is both -- it is grappling and it is an artificial drill. How difficult is that to understand?

And this is precisely why I don't want to discuss things with the HFY cultmembers -- they are so brainwashed, so used to not thinking (in a rational way), so caught up in their fantasy, that they can't grasp the simplest of things.

[t_niehoff]

The context and the usage of the term in the manner that I'm referring to WAS at the time unique to HFY. As for anything you learned in 1993?? Big fricken deal. I have Sihings who learned HFY from my Sifu all the way back to 1977. Before TWC was even known in the USA.


People can claim anything. Too bad there isn't any evidence. ;)



and you're on crack if you think you learned our forms.


I saw the HFY SNT at the VTM and I already knew it. When Garrett askedme what I thought of HFY I told him then that it looked like TWC with more theory.



Gu Lao punch?? Really??? Now that is funny.

Go look a true Gu Lao punch. And then feel free to come back here and re-edit your post. Because this is silliest thing you've written yet.


Well, Benny goes and studies with Robert, and learns the punch. He later writes an article talking about the "HFY punch". You say that the stuff in the article shows Robert took from HFY. I'm showing that it was the other way round -- Benny took it from Robert.



Sad for you that you consider this a pile of rubbish. Truly shows what an ignorant fool you are.


I'm sure the Scientologists feel the same way.



Yes, we've heard you say this a million times. Appears it is the ONLY thing you learned from Robert which is too bad.


That's not the only thing, but it may be the most important. But I can see why you don't like it: it is the bullsh1t filter.



more so-called wisdom from a poser.


You see, that's a personal attack. And I'm surprised you don't like wisdom from posers -- that seems to be all you listen to.



More hypocracy and back-peddling. I'm sure you'll re-edit your prior posts to conform to this last paragraph too.


No need to -- I'm sorry that your mind is so confused with theoretical nonsense that you can't follow simple reasoning.



What other great wisdom did you learn from sitting on the sidelines and not will touching anyone's hand??


Oh, this is an allusion to when I was at the VTM seminar. FWIW, I did participate in those parts that interested me (like Rene's and Marty's parts of the seminar). The one I opted out of was Benny teaching chi sao. There is nothing Benny could teach me.

Asfar as touching hands gfoes, I did chi sao with loads of people there (Jeglum, Rene, Dave, Dzu, etc.). In fact, Dave, Dzu, and I wereout of ont floor of the VTM until 2am training when wecaught Benny and his minions sneaking out to have a private lesson from Garrett. It was after that incident that I wouldn't play with Benny's guys anymore.



Truly sorry for re-joining this thread. Will leave if Terence is done talking smack.

Good. Then maybe next time you think twice.

[t_niehoff]

Terrence,

Who are you? Your nobody. You don’t know HFY. You sit in your little chair hiding behind your keyboard.

You want to test your skill? Come test it in Phoenix, you arrogant little sh1t!

Btw, why do you constantly edit your posts? You can’t keep your nutty thoughts straight? Or do you constantly change your mind because you don’t know what your talking about? The truth doesn’t change but your words do!

Yes, I don't know HFY. Just like I don't know Yellow Bamboo. Just like I don't know all kinds of silly things. You don't need to know something to recognize it is nonsense.

Oh, another deadly internet challenge. I guess that proves you're tough or that I'm somehow afraid to take the time,spend the money, etc.to travel thousands of miles to . . . .

Why do I keep editing my posts? Mainly to correct typing mistakes. I type fast and then send them off, and after rereading them notice that Ijoinedseveral words togeter (example). What do you care if I edit them?

You're right -- the truth doesn't change. But fantasy sure does,

Now, if you want to continue responding to me and have me continue to tell you why HFY is silly and nonsense, and how it is not legitimate WCK, etc. please, do go on. I'm more than happy to oblige. :)

[t_niehoff]

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$.:rolleyes: Best of luck to you bro...

I tell you what, why don't you prove that HFY existed prior to Garrett Gee. Show me a single HFY practitioner, show me Wang Ming, show me anyone that even knew of or heard of HFY prior to Garrett Gee. I'm waiting.

You can't do it. No one can. Because HFY didn't exist prior to Garrett Gee. He made it up.

Dude, I don't care about "reputations" among TCMAists. That proves diddly-squat. Most TCMA is fantasy fu. How did these people earn their reputations? Certainly not by fighting, not using their martial arts. Not by producing fighters. No, we have people like you who believe without any real, solid evidence the nonsense they hear.

[Wayfaring]

Sheesh. I leave a thread for a few days and look what you guys do to it. There's some interesting things to talk about here like the live/dead hands grappling stuff, and a whole lot other more related to a train wreck.

With the stand-up grappling topics we were discussing, the aim of stand up grappling is to restrict an opponent's movement in some fashion while not restricting your movement so you can move to a position of advantage, execute a technique like a takedown/submission, or strike. We can talk about "fully committed" attempts at this and "partially committed", live / dead hands but when it gets to the fighting application part of it the skill involved is still in isolating a particular part of your opponent's movement for the exact period of time necessary for you to move to a position of advantage, execute a technique, or strike. This involves technique, timing, range.

In BJJ and Judo they call this "grip fighting", maybe wrestling too. There are different approaches in Greco and freestyle as well. Muy Thai has a unique approach to this too. When you add in striking scenarios the hardest skill to develop is where to do the grappling so as to leave you striking options or a grappling position advantage or submission that removes your opponents striking options.

From what I've observed this is one area of the overall fight game where WC could contribute greatly. I mean couldn't we look at from one viewpoint the exercise of "chi sau" as training for one system of grip fighting?

These are the interesting things to me out of this thread to continue to discuss.

[Wayfaring]

You can't do it. No one can. Because HFY didn't exist prior to Garrett Gee. He made it up.

T,

One thing is for sure. HFY wasn't taught in the US prior to Garrett Gee teaching it. But just from logical rational thought, you don't develop that kind of high level of wing chun skill in application by making something up. Seminars are one thing and you don't like Benny Meng - sure.

I mean I think you can even ask your own wing chun teacher Robert what his perception of Sifu Gee's skills are if you don't want to have personal contact yourself. And Robert's learned from more than one source.

And on a side note, I think you'll have a good time interacting with JP. You'll find outside of arguing on the Internet he's a pretty level guy. No Moonie or anything. If you have any of your group sparring guys meeting maybe you could invite him. Or just spar a little or something no death matches.

Threads like this escalate and raise stakes in personal interaction so they don't occur. Or get blown out of proportion. All that is kind of silly.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Want to weigh in on two things, here.

First, yes there are some elements of grappling in chi sao - but to simply call chi sao a form of grappling (with striking thrown in) is just plain foolish. The object of wing chun is to hit your opponent. And while it is true that chi sao teaches more than just how and when to hit, that doesn't change the fact that hitting is the goal.

Secondly, I have long believed that both William Cheung and Garrett Gee learned from the same unidentified source - one referring to it as Traditional Wing Chun (TWC) and the other calling it Hung Fa Yi (HFY).

The fact that both systems look so amazingly alike and yet both men have always been so reticent to bad mouth the other (or accuse the other of stealing)...

says volumes.

BUT THIS IS AN OLD, DEAD HORSE....or at least it should be.

[Wayfaring]

I don't accept that "live hand" is the sole province of WC, HFY or otherwise. Or that wrestlers can't do it and don't do it.

Yeah, they are among the best at it out of all the strictly grappling arts. Judo second. BJJ mostly lags behind here. I think WC can contribute here to retain the striking related aspect. Muy Thai has a good clinch system that retains striking.



... the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus

God that was so funny I had to go look it up. I'm left with the impression that anerlich is slightly more nerdy than I previously thought, although still pretty funny.

[Wayfaring]

First, yes there are some elements of grappling in chi sao - but to simply call chi sao a form of grappling (with striking thrown in) is just plain foolish. The object of wing chun is to hit your opponent. And while it is true that chi sao teaches more than justl how and when to hit, that doesn't change the fact that hitting is the goal.

If you look at it only in absolutes it is foolish. And granted openings in chi sau are responded to mostly with punches. (Although I have been neck clinched / snapped down from a chi sau opening and offbalanced by someone stepping on my foot).

But bear with me. A bridge is grappling in a very broad sense. It represents restricted movement. Books like Renzo Gracie's talking about fight ranges speak of free movement, restricted movement, and ground. Now you can say that the object of chi sau is to strike your opponent. But if you develop skill in control of the bridge, and what presents itself is a takedown, will you take it or not? The kicks in wing chun are kind of designed to remove the supporting balance and take someone to the ground.

So what exactly would you say the difference is in grip fighting in an MMA environment and the bridge in wing chun?



Secondly, I have long believed that both William Cheung and Garrett Gee learned from the same unidentified source - one referring to it as Traditional Wing Chun (TWC) and the other calling it Hung Fa Yi (HFY).

The distant cousin theory that may make sense but will never be substantiated. They are different now. You're right that's a dead horse. But two distinct points of reference kind of negate the made up thing.

[anerlich]

God that was so funny I had to go look it up. I'm left with the impression that anerlich is slightly more nerdy than I previously thought, although still pretty funny.

I work in IT. I'm probably guilty as charged. :o


Yes, Virginia, chi sao is both

Who's this Virginia? Does she know Hermes Trismegistus?


And this is precisely why I don't want to discuss things with the HFY cultmembers

How about giving the rest of us a break from your lectures for a while too?

[vingtsunplaya]

I tell you what, why don't you prove that HFY existed prior to Garrett Gee. Show me a single HFY practitioner, show me Wang Ming, show me anyone that even knew of or heard of HFY prior to Garrett Gee. I'm waiting.

You can't do it. No one can. Because HFY didn't exist prior to Garrett Gee. He made it up.

Dude, I don't care about "reputations" among TCMAists. That proves diddly-squat. Most TCMA is fantasy fu. How did these people earn their reputations? Certainly not by fighting, not using their martial arts. Not by producing fighters. No, we have people like you who believe without any real, solid evidence the nonsense they hear.

Terrance,

I'm not really sure what you think I believe or don't believe. I was simply trying to tell you that people with some serious MA knowledge have great respect for Sifu Gee. As far as what I believe he can or cannot do, I don't know, I've never seen the man operate. But, I know people who have, people whom I trust, and they say he has real skill. Now I'm sure you'll try and say something snappy about me "trusting the wrong people" or something juvenile like that, but these are all guys whom I have seen beat alot of @$$ with little effort and they can't touch Sifu Gee. Now, call it HFY, call it TWC, call it yourmomisafat*****, I don't care. What it boils down to is that he is the Grandmanster of an entire system of MA which, if you did any research at all instead of wasting everybody's time on this forum, you would find out HFY can directly trace its roots to the Boxer rebellion and beyond. The symbology present throughout the system shows, without a doubt, it was not "made up" by any one man. That is a fact, and is indisputable so don't even try without actually doing the research and citing me your sources (come on, your a lawyer right?). Hopefully JP can teach you a thing or two (I don't mean through violence either) about the system and it's roots. I think if you would actually drop your unending criticism of things you don't really know anything about, you may actually learn something through all this. Even if you think the MAs of HFY are crap, the history of Chinese culture and how it plays into the system will probably humble you.

Or you could just continue to be a douche and stay stuck within your own feeble boundaries. I suppose it's no loss/gain to me either way. I know this though, you sound a LOT like the fox in the "sour grapes" story. You can't hope to be able to understand or grasp something, so you might as well bash it and ruin it for everyone else. Nice. Let me know how that works out for ya little guy. You must be a real hit at parties eh? :D

[t_niehoff]

Terrance,

I'm not really sure what you think I believe or don't believe. I was simply trying to tell you that people with some serious MA knowledge have great respect for Sifu Gee


Who? You talk about "people with serious knowledge" -- gung fu or martial art isn't about "knowlededge", it is about SKILL, fighting skill. Most of TCMA "knowledge" is nonsense, it's fantasy. Real knowledge only comes from doing it, from fighting. So who are the great fighters that have respect for Garrett?



As far as what I believe he can or cannot do, I don't know, I've never seen the man operate. But, I know people who have, people whom I trust, and they say he has real skill.


Skill at what? You can only tell someone's fighting skill by seeing them fight, particularly with competent fighters. Not only that, but you can only develop fighting skill by and through fighting. Since he's never fought in his life, let alone with competent fighters, how can anyone says he has skill?



Now I'm sure you'll try and say something snappy about me "trusting the wrong people" or something juvenile like that, but these are all guys whom I have seen beat alot of @$$ with little effort and they can't touch Sifu Gee.


They aren't trying to really "touch him." They're not fighting. Put Garrett in against a low level MT fighter and Garrett would be out in seconds. And that's not meant as an insult -- it's just that you can't develop the skill to deal with competent fighters, like a MT fighter, by not fighting. You only will develop the skill to beat the MT fighter by getting in and doing it, and doing loads of it.



Now, call it HFY, call it TWC, call it yourmomisafat*****, I don't care. What it boils down to is that he is the Grandmanster of an entire system of MA which, if you did any research at all instead of wasting everybody's time on this forum, you would find out HFY can directly trace its roots to the Boxer rebellion and beyond.


I've done the research. You're just listenting to the marketing, the story they're presenting as history. But that isn't true. As I said, show me ONE HFY practitioner that existed prior to Garrett. ONE. You can't. I could take any WCK practitioner on this forum at random other than a HFY person, and reliably trace theri lineage back to the Red Boats, showing real people (with proof they existed) that we could show really trained WCK. You can't do that with Garrett. Why? Because there was no HFY prior to GG. It didn't exist. He made it up.



The symbology present throughout the system shows, without a doubt, it was not "made up" by any one man. That is a fact, and is indisputable so don't even try without actually doing the research and citing me your sources (come on, your a lawyer right?). Hopefully JP can teach you a thing or two (I don't mean through violence either) about the system and it's roots. I think if you would actually drop your unending criticism of things you don't really know anything about, you may actually learn something through all this. Even if you think the MAs of HFY are crap, the history of Chinese culture and how it plays into the system will probably humble you.


Are you suggesting that Garrett is simply too stupid to add symbology to his system? ;) That it would need to be done by committee?



Or you could just continue to be a douche and stay stuck within your own feeble boundaries. I suppose it's no loss/gain to me either way. I know this though, you sound a LOT like the fox in the "sour grapes" story. You can't hope to be able to understand or grasp something, so you might as well bash it and ruin it for everyone else. Nice. Let me know how that works out for ya little guy. You must be a real hit at parties eh? :D

"Sour grapes"? "Ruin it for everyone else"? You're funny.

All you need to do is look at what you (or HFY) offer as evidence, as proof of your claims. You talk about history but can't offer any evidence HFY existed prior to GG. You can't bring forward a single HFY practitioner priorto GG. You offer stories. But no evidence.

You talk about GG's "reputation", how some unnamed people think he's got skil, but you can't provide any evidence of him actually using that alleged skill or doing the things any person needs to do to develop that skill.

You believe despite the complete lack of solid, genuine evidence. Well, I don't. For me, the lack of that evidence IS evidence. That's not "sour grapes", that's not "spoiling it for everyone" (like it's some party), that's called being rational. It's called being a critical thinker. Maybe you should try it.

[CFT]

All you need to do is look at what you (or HFY) offer as evidence, as proof of your claims. You talk about history but can't offer any evidence HFY existed prior to GG. You can't bring forward a single HFY practitioner prior to GG. You offer stories. But no evidence.Never mind "prior to", I'd have expected some of his contemporaries (sihing/dai) to have surfaced by now. The Qing dynasty is long dead and the Shaolin Temple is promoted by the Communist government. Surely nothing to be afraid of now?

[Wayfaring]

So what exactly would you say the difference is in grip fighting in an MMA environment and the bridge in wing chun?


So I'll answer my own question. In MMA environments the distance where short distance power is most effective is avoided. Fighters punch their way in then collapse quickly to greco wrestling range. Or stay at a longer range. Takedowns go under a punch usually by changing levels to initiate. In short distance range fighters cover up with what in Muy Thai looks a little bit like the jong sau in that it is a structured cover up that can absorb a punch. They stay covered up for as little time as possible, then either clinch or punch their way out.

In WC, if there is no bridge, strike. No difference there. The bridge itself however keeps the fight at short distance striking range. Then skills with the bridge allow a WC fighter to manipulate or sink the bridge, change facing, and remain in short distance striking range to cause the most damage.

[Ned]

They aren't trying to really "touch him." They're not fighting.

I've done the research.


T, from the sounds of your research, its full of Bull. first off you talk about real fighting all the time but its only sparring with pads and limits. Before doing any research try researching real fighting first like maybe going up againist anyone you wrongly convicted with your "research" jargon. Do it without the pad and any limits, rules, legal consequences, ect. its called critical analysis.




You believe despite the complete lack of solid, genuine evidence. Well, I don't. .... that's called being rational. It's called being a critical thinker. Maybe you should try it.

go talk to youself.

[Wayfaring]

They aren't trying to really "touch him." They're not fighting. Put Garrett in against a low level MT fighter and Garrett would be out in seconds.
From what I have personally seen I am going to respectfully disagree with you on this point. People have seen different things.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by Wayfaring
So what exactly would you say the difference is in grip fighting in an MMA environment and the bridge in wing chun?



So I'll answer my own question. In MMA environments the distance where short distance power is most effective is avoided. Fighters punch their way in then collapse quickly to greco wrestling range. Or stay at a longer range. Takedowns go under a punch usually by changing levels to initiate. In short distance range fighters cover up with what in Muay Thai looks a little bit like the jong sau in that it is a structured cover up that can absorb a punch. They stay covered up for as little time as possible, then either clinch or punch their way out.

In WC, if there is no bridge, strike. No difference there. The bridge itself however keeps the fight at short distance striking range. Then skills with the bridge allow a WC fighter to manipulate or sink the bridge, change facing, and remain in short distance striking range to cause the most damage.


***ACTUALLY, I did respond yesterday, but my computer locked up as I was trying to hit the "Submit reply" - and then the doorbell rang and I had to take care of something.

My take is similar to your take. The bridge in wing chun is meant to keep the fight in short range striking distance - whereas in mma, (and of course this usually means Muay Thai coverup or knee/elbow clinch work...or perhaps a wrestling/grappling clinch to shoot or takedown)...

but not the short range striking that wing chun prefers. (The overlapping styles exception to this being elbow and knee strikes from semi-clinch).

And I believe that wing chun can bring a lot to the table in this regard as far as nhb, mma is concerned.

But the truth is, from my point of view, though I try to fight my way (with long range punching, kicking, footwork) to the close quarter wing chun range (quite often using a bridge) in order to strike from there...

I'm not married to the idea that this where I have to be at all costs - and this is what I have to do at all costs.

In other words, the wing chun bridge is meant to get you in position to STRIKE, and possibly followed by a sweep takedown. It's NOT meant to go to full clinch, or to set up a takedown or shot from full clinch.

So therefore the wing chun "bridge" idea is limited in it's scope - too limited.

Fighting requires being ready and able to do all of the above. You can't always control the distance to your preferred range - and then stay exactly there and finish the fight. Reality doesn't work that way.

[sanjuro_ronin]

In MMA environments the distance where short distance power is most effective is avoided. Fighters punch their way in then collapse quickly to greco wrestling range. Or stay at a longer range.

Where grappling is an option, short range striking will "degrade" into clicnh work and inevitably, grappling.
Just the way things work.
Strikers prefer to stay at a "longer range" because they avoid the grappling/clinch situation and their strikes carry momentum as well, not just "short impact power".
Striking at short range isn't avoid in MMA, the WELL TRAINED grappling element takes lots of the "sting" out of it and unless someone has trained that short power VS the grappling techniques they will encounter, typically, the short power won't be as effective as needed.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Well put, sanjuro...but what I see as potential in this regard is someone trained in wing chun and in grappling/wrestling being able to utilize short range striking with effect...

and thereby helping to change the whole dynamic of the fight.

In other words, another big, effective tool to put into the toolbox - and one (wing chun short range striking/bridging) that people aren't expecting to have to deal with.

[duende]

But bear with me. A bridge is grappling in a very broad sense. It represents restricted movement. Books like Renzo Gracie's talking about fight ranges speak of free movement, restricted movement, and ground. Now you can say that the object of chi sau is to strike your opponent. But if you develop skill in control of the bridge, and what presents itself is a takedown, will you take it or not? The kicks in wing chun are kind of designed to remove the supporting balance and take someone to the ground.

So what exactly would you say the difference is in grip fighting in an MMA environment and the bridge in wing chun?


Thanks Dave,

This was my point all along. We train Chi Sao to control the bridge at various timeframes. Chi Sao for is not simply a method to set up a strike. If you are in striking range however, and it is the time to hit... then great. But if not, then you'll most likely get hit yourself. Chi Sao can help you keep an opponent from achieving "grip control" which can be very helpful in preventing yourself from being taken down.

Interesting enough, I am in Tucson this week visiting my folks. My cousin happens to be a coach here for a high school football team. Well, he had me come down and teach his star receiver some simple Kiu Sau techniques to use on the scrimage line. The kid is smaller than most defensive backs and he was getting held up too much at the line, by the "bump and run". Thats a defensive line technique where they push up against your center and try and uplift you. Kind of like our snow plowing. Anyways, the counter technique for this is called "The Swim", and it wasn't working out for the kid.

Anyways, by using some of the controlled bridging I showed him, the kid was able to keep some hands off of him at practice. We'll see how it works out in the future, but it was definitley a fun experience.


Anerlich,

Our terminology like Contact/Control is just that... terminology. I don't see, where I hyped it up or made it sound like some revolutionary ground-breaking concept. We simply have terms for certain applications of physical skill. End of Story.


Terence,

I seriously doubt you would act like such a Jack-A$$ in real life.

Robert came by our school in 1998 or so. It was at that time, he told us that our Tan Sau was too high and would block our vision etc. Fine, that was his opinion at the time, he wasn't aware of our application, covering of gate, or occupation of space. However oddly enough, our punches use the exact same reference points, and he most definitely witnessed them too.

So another words, if you want to play chicken and egg, we most certainly can. But it is a waste of bandwidth and everyone's time here, not to mention our own.

As for your opinion on HFY. Somehow, somewhere you got emotionally attached to this hatred of yours. It's too bad really. I've had nice talks recently with both Robert and Alan from the CSL system.

We have all decided to move on and share our personal learning experiences here on forums like this.

Obviously, you are your own person etc... and that's good too.

But if you look at your posts. In all truth... the person you are arguing the most with is YOURSELF.



Take care everyone. My apologies for contributing to the negative energy here.

Best,

Alex

[t_niehoff]

T, from the sounds of your research, its full of Bull. first off you talk about real fighting all the time but its only sparring with pads and limits. Before doing any research try researching real fighting first like maybe going up againist anyone you wrongly convicted with your "research" jargon. Do it without the pad and any limits, rules, legal consequences, ect. its called critical analysis.


My research isn't "full of bull" -- it's the HFY story that is nothing but bullsh1t. But it is a very simple thing to prove me wrong: just provide independently verifiable evidence of Garrett's WCK lineage. If you do that, I'll admit I'm wrong. I have absolutely no problem changing my mind if someone provides me with genuine evidence. And it's easy enough to prove lineage if you have a lineage (since every nonHFY person in WCK can do that). But HFY marketing tries to focus our attention of everything BUT this simple fact. And there is a very good reason for that.

Another thing -- there are certain dead giveaways that tell me people aren't fighting and they know hardly anything about fighting. Talking about "real fighting" is one of those giveaways. It is a dead giveaway that the person speaking is a fantasy-based martial artist.



go talk to youself.

Oh, its too much fun to talk to guys like you. :)

[t_niehoff]

Where grappling is an option, short range striking will "degrade" into clicnh work and inevitably, grappling.

Just the way things work.


Exactly. EXACTLY. Thank you. And the fact taht you know this tells me you have some experience -- that's how things will work. It's not theory, it's not how you think they will work, that's what will happen.

In my view, that's what WCK's method is, a form of "dirty" clinch boxing, combining elements of grappling and striking. You can't fight on the inside without it turning into clinch.



Strikers prefer to stay at a "longer range" because they avoid the grappling/clinch situation and their strikes carry momentum as well, not just "short impact power".
Striking at short range isn't avoid in MMA, the WELL TRAINED grappling element takes lots of the "sting" out of it and unless someone has trained that short power VS the grappling techniques they will encounter, typically, the short power won't be as effective as needed.

And there are some MMAists that are very good at clinch-and-pound, or dirty clinch boxing.

Very insightful post.

[t_niehoff]

Terence,

I seriously doubt you would act like such a Jack-A$$ in real life.


As anyone who knows me will tell you, I am a very straightforward person. I call it like I see it.



Robert came by our school in 1998 or so. It was at that time, he told us that our Tan Sau was too high and would block our vision etc. Fine, that was his opinion at the time, he wasn't aware of our application, covering of gate, or occupation of space. However oddly enough, our punches use the exact same reference points, and he most definitely witnessed them too.

So another words, if you want to play chicken and egg, we most certainly can. But it is a waste of bandwidth and everyone's time here, not to mention our own.


Yes, it is a waste of time because Robert doesn't teach anything similar to HFY. Robert had trained in TWC (the forerunner of HFY), so he was already aware of the high tan sao, etc.



As for your opinion on HFY. Somehow, somewhere you got emotionally attached to this hatred of yours. It's too bad really. I've had nice talks recently with both Robert and Alan from the CSL system.


You guys keep wanting to make this into some "emotional" issue. It isn't emotional at all -- it's a rational issue for me. All the evailable, solid evidence and critical thinking points to one conclusion: Garrett created HFY. Just like Henry Leung created Buddha Fist. Am I emotional about that too? ;) Do I hate all Buddha fist people? LOL! No, it's just the only sensible conclusion.



We have all decided to move on and share our personal learning experiences here on forums like this.


I don't care if you want to share your "personal learning experiences" in HFY. I don't care if Scientologists want to share their views. I am saying that my view is that HFY is nonsense, and so anytime you want to share your view with me or argue with me, that will be my response -- HFY is nonsense. It's silly. It is comic book stuff. Knwoing that, why do you guys continue to want to argue with me? I'd think that you'd just want to leave me alone and not argue with me. But, either way, it's all fine.

[duende]

Secondly, I have long believed that both William Cheung and Garrett Gee learned from the same unidentified source - one referring to it as Traditional Wing Chun (TWC) and the other calling it Hung Fa Yi (HFY).


All Wing Chun comes from the same source. And as both TWC and HFY have history that ties them to this original source, being able to relate to expressions found in both systems could mean that you are in fact seeing expressions from the original source.

Not trying to start a debate here, but if you think about the commonalities amongst all our systems... then one can possible boil everything down to the unifying original thread.

Therefore, it is not fair for either system to be writtten off simply as the same thing, or worse... as a copy of eachother like what Terence is doing. This casts off both our systems as merely just a few rudimentery techniques.


I find that highly insulting and ignorant. Despite all his back-peddling and self-affirmation.

Yes.. we do share some things like our high elbow/straight wrist Ying Bong Sau, but did you know that HFY also has a bent wrist/low elbow Hok Bong Sau? One is meant for the big wheel Body mechanics and Jeui Ying, while the other is meant for the little wheel body and deui ying facing.

I've also seen some TWC kicks and hand techniques that are not present in HFY.

So there are some similarities, but there are also some differences.

Anyways Victor, I know GM Gee has been traveling more frequently to NY these days. In the pursuit of good will, I could try and set-up some time for you to meet with him. PM me if you are interested.

Best,

Alex

[Wayfaring]

Where grappling is an option, short range striking will "degrade" into clicnh work and inevitably, grappling.
Just the way things work.

I would say in short range people either clinch and grapple, clinch and work the clinch with strikes or step angle off and punch their way out. There's a natural tendency to clinch, which you see even in boxing.

Skilled strikers can make people miss at short range and angle out without grappling, like Muhammid Ali's rope-a-dope.

In MT, Buakaw's degrading into clinch work doesn't lead to grappling but "degrading" the condition of his opponent to the point they've changed MT rule enforcement to deal with his clinch work strikes.

Skilled wrestlers are able to slip some short range punches or roll with them in clinch initiation to get to the clinch. The cage helps with this.



Strikers prefer to stay at a "longer range" because they avoid the grappling/clinch situation and their strikes carry momentum as well, not just "short impact power".

Yes they do. It also gives them a touch more time to sprawl on takedown attempts. If they catch someone with a punch they move into short range to finish them.



Striking at short range isn't avoid in MMA, the WELL TRAINED grappling element takes lots of the "sting" out of it and unless someone has trained that short power VS the grappling techniques they will encounter, typically, the short power won't be as effective as needed.
A skilled wrestler will duck under a committed punch to get to clinch/takedown range. They are avoiding short range by going from long range to clinch with timing. There's no time to initiate a short range punch from ducking under a punch to clinch. Or they absorb some strikes with hands up and use the cage to help force their way into clinch range.

I would say in each of these scenarios fighters ARE avoiding the short range distance punching range. That's because you can get hit there. Whether avoiding it by staying in long range or avoiding it by moving to clinch with skill that is still avoiding it.

WC can contribute in this by touch skill on the bridge. We are used to force on the bridge, force on a jong structure, and maintaining our body structures to deal with and deflect force.

[Ultimatewingchun]

It's not a question of good will, Alex. I have no ill-will towards Garrett Gee. I'm sure he's a nice man who would be willing talk to me about his HFY, about TWC, about whatever.

But meeting with him in this manner is not going to change anything in my mind.

So he might talk about this or that aspect of his HFY wing chun that I haven't heard before - but it's all in the ACTIONS.

And short of some sort of actual sparring (which I'm not suggesting because I don't go around challenging people, least of all someone who claims to be a Grandmaster of a given system)...But...

short of that,

I need to SEE something in action if I'm going to be convinced of anything.

You say that there's a very big difference between TWC and HFY. But for me, the only thing that matters is actual fight efficiency, not some technical/definitional differences that may or may not amount to anything significant in actual fighting.

So where are the HFY vids for the world to see?

He clearly made a decision long ago that they won't be coming: no vids about forms, drills, chi sao, kiu sao, sparring, weapons...nothing.

Fine, that's his business.

But I'm just not interested in persuing any more "debates" about HFY without them.

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

Now as far as Terence goes, yeah, he talks through his A55 waaaay more than from anywhere else, but what else is new? I don't take him seriously, quite frankly.

[vingtsunplaya]

Who? You talk about "people with serious knowledge" -- gung fu or martial art isn't about "knowlededge", it is about SKILL, fighting skill. Most of TCMA "knowledge" is nonsense, it's fantasy. Real knowledge only comes from doing it, from fighting. So who are the great fighters that have respect for Garrett?

You Dolt. When I talk about knowledge, that means skill. You dont' get that type of knowledge any other way than by touching hands with others. It directly equates to skill.


Skill at what? You can only tell someone's fighting skill by seeing them fight, particularly with competent fighters. Not only that, but you can only develop fighting skill by and through fighting. Since he's never fought in his life, let alone with competent fighters, how can anyone says he has skill?

What the hell makes you think Sifu Gee has never fought in his life? He is in San Fransico; one of the most prolific MA communities in the U.S. You don't think he has people walking into the Kwoon weekly if not daily wanting to test him?!? If you don't then you really are a freaking retard.


They aren't trying to really "touch him." They're not fighting. Put Garrett in against a low level MT fighter and Garrett would be out in seconds. And that's not meant as an insult -- it's just that you can't develop the skill to deal with competent fighters, like a MT fighter, by not fighting. You only will develop the skill to beat the MT fighter by getting in and doing it, and doing loads of it.

So where did Muay Tai come from? It came from the same d@mn place as WC. I guess through time, WC guys have let themselves go and the Muay tai guys are the real deal now? Not to beat a dead horse, but your ignorance is truly laughable.


I've done the research. You're just listenting to the marketing, the story they're presenting as history. But that isn't true. As I said, show me ONE HFY practitioner that existed prior to Garrett. ONE. You can't. I could take any WCK practitioner on this forum at random other than a HFY person, and reliably trace theri lineage back to the Red Boats, showing real people (with proof they existed) that we could show really trained WCK. You can't do that with Garrett. Why? Because there was no HFY prior to GG. It didn't exist. He made it up.

Have you not gone to the HFY website where it lists Sifu Gee's lineage all the way back to Hung gun Bui? What is your lineage (I mean past where all of the inbreeding started)? Can you prove anything to me? I asked you last time to show me some proof and all you come back with is more questions to my questions. So, I guess we are just going to talk in circles now huh?


Are you suggesting that Garrett is simply too stupid to add symbology to his system? ;) That it would need to be done by committee?

Simply stating that the kind of depth and history Sifu Gee has talked about in the past is most definately NOT made up. Of course because you haven't heard any of it, it must be false right? So since you have never flown up to space and experienced it for yourself, it doesn't exist either huh? Are you one of those wierdos who thinks the moon landings took place somewhere in Nevada? That is just a splendid way to look at the world. So, the world must be pretty flat in St Louis huh?



"Sour grapes"? "Ruin it for everyone else"? You're funny.

Just calling it like I see it ignorant wretch.

All you need to do is look at what you (or HFY) offer as evidence, as proof of your claims. You talk about history but can't offer any evidence HFY existed prior to GG. You can't bring forward a single HFY practitioner priorto GG. You offer stories. But no evidence.

The evidence is in the system. But again, you are ignorant of any of it, so why would you think it could be a possibility that there may be something out there that the MIGHTY terrance doesn't know. I forgot your omnipresence. Sorry. You know everything right? And if you don't know it, it must not exist huh?

You talk about GG's "reputation", how some unnamed people think he's got skil, but you can't provide any evidence of him actually using that alleged skill or doing the things any person needs to do to develop that skill.

The proof is in the pudding Terrance. People try and take Sifu Gee down, they get completely neutralized. You don't need to hit someone to prove your superiority over them. I mean just look how you continuously make yourself look like a complete beetle headed idiot and all you have done is post on this forum. No punching involved. Maybe it is too many hits to the face and head which have made you retarded? Maybe no one told you you don't actually have to take it in the @$$ to be considered gay. If you give head to other guys, that is gay too. Just FYI.

You believe despite the complete lack of solid, genuine evidence. Well, I don't. For me, the lack of that evidence IS evidence. That's not "sour grapes", that's not "spoiling it for everyone" (like it's some party), that's called being rational. It's called being a critical thinker. Maybe you should try it.

Critical thinking is knowing enough to know that I don't know enough. Sycophantic, self centered jerk-offs like you think they know everything. I'm not nearly that stupid. To be so very close-minded must be so lonely for you... Not to worry, you still have your hands to please you and keep you company... After your done giving head down at the park that is...;)

[Mr Punch]

LOL, dives in with a lecture to others on how to behave on the forum, and six posts in and this is what you've got to mate?! Thanks for playing: door's that way.

[Kansuke]

I'm not nearly that stupid.




Don't sell yourself short. You seem pretty stupid.

[t_niehoff]

Critical thinking is knowing enough to know that I don't know enough.


You're partly correct. Critical thinking is to draw conclusions from available, quality evidence. As I said, if you can show that HFY existed prior to Garrett with independently verifiable evidence, then do so. Prove my conclusion wrong. The only meaningful evidence of WCK history is lineage. But we all know that you can't prove HFY lineage past Garrett. Yet you get upset when someone points that out and points out that the only rational conclusion based on the available evidence is that Garrett created HFY. And, since you can't rebut my conslusion, you get upset. Adn then claim that I'm the one being emotional!



Sycophantic, self centered jerk-offs like you think they know everything. I'm not nearly that stupid. To be so very close-minded must be so lonely for you... Not to worry, you still have your hands to please you and keep you company... After your done giving head down at the park that is...;)

Then you make inane, personal attacks which only prove 1) that you have no evidence to rebut my conclusion and 2) you're intellectually bankrupt.

[t_niehoff]

Now as far as Terence goes, yeah, he talks through his A55 waaaay more than from anywhere else, but what else is new? I don't take him seriously, quite frankly.


Apparently my ass makes more sense than your brain. ;)

BTW, still awaiting your sparring video against the hook. When are we going to see it? You know, the one you told bullshido you were making. When you did that, were you talking with your brain?

[anerlich]

Apparently my ass makes more sense than your brain.

Well, you've been talking out of it for long enough.

[sanjuro_ronin]

well, you've been talking out of it for long enough.

bwwaahh !!!
:d:d

[Vajramusti]

Why not just ignore the HFY posts. Engaging them IMO serves no constructive purpose.

joy chaudhuri

[Ultimatewingchun]

The vid has been held up due to a personal issue of the man who was going to spar with me. But I know him for close to 20 years, and he will return sooner or later, I'm sure - and the vid will be made and posted then.

But in the meantime, Mr. I-never-change-the-subject-in-order-to-avoid-the-real-issues...

I'm sure we can expect more butt talk from you.

[t_niehoff]

Why not just ignore the HFY posts. Engaging them IMO serves no constructive purpose.

joy chaudhuri

I agree with you that engaging them serves no constructive purpose. I'm not seeking out any HFY people to have discussions with. But when they intercede in my discussions, particularly by referencing me or my post, I'm not going to let them get away with impunity. Instead, I'll point out why anything they say can't be taken seriously. I think that in this way, I'll get fewer HFY people engaging me.

[t_niehoff]

Well, you've been talking out of it for long enough.

Like Rampage said: "My power comes from my ass!" ;)

[t_niehoff]

The vid has been held up due to a personal issue of the man who was going to spar with me. But I know him for close to 20 years, and he will return sooner or later, I'm sure - and the vid will be made and posted then.

But in the meantime, Mr. I-never-change-the-subject-in-order-to-avoid-the-real-issues...

I'm sure we can expect more butt talk from you.

Too bad you live in the wilderness away from any boxing gyms or you could just go there and do it against someone other than one of your students. But then, I'm sure you need just the right guy to makethe video. No sweat.

BTW, I think Kung Fu Joe is still waiting for your call to roll with him. Or, are you waiting for someone for that too?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yoooooouuu have the nerve to talk about living in the wilderness!!! :eek:


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz:rolleyes:

[t_niehoff]

Yoooooouuu have the nerve to talk about living in the wilderness!!! :eek:


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz:rolleyes:

I see, no answer. That's cool. And expected.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ditto that for you.

You posted endlessly one winter about how you were going to show us a thing or two-or-three at the Cleveland wing chun get together - and then you didn't show...

and mysteriously disappeared from this forum for many months after that.

Nuff said. :rolleyes:

[duende]

Ditto that for you.

You posted endlessly one winter about how you were going to show us a thing or two-or-three at the Cleveland wing chun get together - and then you didn't show...

and mysteriously disappeared from this forum for many months after that.

Nuff said. :rolleyes:

Too true. This is T's Modus Operandi in spades!

[t_niehoff]

Ditto that for you.

You posted endlessly one winter about how you were going to show us a thing or two-or-three at the Cleveland wing chun get together - and then you didn't show...

and mysteriously disappeared from this forum for many months after that.

Nuff said. :rolleyes:


Victor, do you remember that I was initially interested but that our lengthy discussions turned on the issue of limiting the get together to WCK people only? That's what you wanted to do. And how it turned out. If you recall, and if you don't check the thread, I wanted to bring in some competent fighters, like MMA guys, to mix with us -- since IMO that's the only way to really see how we're doing, where we are short, etc. You didn't want that (no big surprise). Is your memory getting clearer? Do you recall my telling you that just getting together with WCK people was a waste of time and all the reasons why it is a waste of time?

BTW, I never said I was going to show anyone "a thing or two or three". But I do believe I said that if we had some decent MMA guys we'd ALL learn a thing or two. You just don't get it -- we all know WCK. Getting together to talk about WCK, do chi sao, and lightly spar isn't going to teach us jack. What we need to do is mix with competent fighters, compare notes, and figure out how to make out stuff work against them. That's what I'm interested in.

And fwiw, I wasn't posting for a while since I was recovering from a fairly serious (at my age) injury I got at a sub grappling tourney.

[anerlich]

Like Rampage said: "My power comes from my ass!"

And there the similarity ends.

[Wayfaring]

And fwiw, I wasn't posting for a while since I was recovering from a fairly serious (at my age) injury I got at a sub grappling tourney.

What, someone injured your typing hand, thus putting on hold your rising career as a "real fighter"?

[Liddel]

Honestly i enduldge in my fair share of BS here on the forum, but little reality check guys...

This thread has digressed into posts from a "pack of whinging b i t c h e s"

Little Australasian saying LOL :p

Too bad were all so far apart - i could throw a BBQ and we could all get drunk and get into some full contact peaknuckle, that is if your egos can handle defeat - i have nimble hands :p no s h i t !

;)
DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

Victor, do you remember that I was initially interested but that our lengthy discussions turned on the issue of limiting the get together to WCK people only? That's what you wanted to do. And how it turned out. If you recall, and if you don't check the thread, I wanted to bring in some competent fighters, like MMA guys, to mix with us -- since IMO that's the only way to really see how we're doing, where we are short, etc. You didn't want that (no big surprise). Is your memory getting clearer? Do you recall my telling you that just getting together with WCK people was a waste of time and all the reasons why it is a waste of time?

BTW, I never said I was going to show anyone "a thing or two or three". But I do believe I said that if we had some decent MMA guys we'd ALL learn a thing or two. You just don't get it -- we all know WCK. Getting together to talk about WCK, do chi sao, and lightly spar isn't going to teach us jack. What we need to do is mix with competent fighters, compare notes, and figure out how to make out stuff work against them. That's what I'm interested in.

And fwiw, I wasn't posting for a while since I was recovering from a fairly serious (at my age) injury I got at a sub grappling tourney.


***BULL5HIT !!! You want to try and rewrite history now, do you?! :rolleyes:

You gave absolutely NO INDICATION WHATSOEVER IN ADVANCE that you were having second thoughts about coming once it was determined that it would be a wing chun-only affair.

God, you're pathetic. :eek:

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

And as for this:

"And fwiw, I wasn't posting for a while since I was recovering from a fairly serious (at my age) injury I got at a sub grappling tourney."

***MORE BULL5HIT. You came back on the forum and never mentioned any injury - you simply said that you (and I'm paraphrasing now) "found something more interesting to do that weekend".

What a load of crap!


Like I've been saying: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[t_niehoff]

Victor, go reread the thread. I told you it would be a waste of time without including competent fighters. I would think that anyone with half a brain could figure out that if someone says something is a waste of time then theyare probably not going to participate. But then, maybe I give people too much credit?

Wayfaring, no my injury didn't effect my typing hand but laid me up for several weeks in such pain (it was a neck injury) that I could hardly move or hold down food, which put me behind at work.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I don't need to go reread the thread.

Instead, you need to know that your BULL5HITTING WAYS are crystal clear to a lot of people around here, including me.

Done.

[Wayfaring]

Can we like go back to talking about the WC bridge and the natural mix of grappling / striking in fighting?

I'm getting kind of bored rehashing the one time in a decade WC people decide they can get together and mix it up at all and who did / didn't show and why. If that type of thing happened monthly or even yearly there'd be less girly drama.

And invite MMA guys along, whatever for all of this type of stuff. Restrictions are stupid. Although I'm not sure what level of people T is talking about w/r to competant fighters. But the better they are the more inspiring it would be.

[TAYLOR1]

Terrence,

How are we supposed to take you seriously when you punk out on things like that get-together? I guess you claimed to “school” some people and then you no-showed?

Lame!

[t_niehoff]

Terrence,

How are we supposed to take you seriously when you punk out on things like that get-together? I guess you claimed to “school” some people and then you no-showed?

Lame!

Oh, goody, another HFY cultmember who can't read yet want to put in his clown-ass $0.02.

How old are you? Twelve?

[Eric_H]

Terrence,

It can't be better said than by your own Sifu:



Its a known lawyer trick that when there is no counter to the argument, then the character is attacked.

[Ultimatewingchun]

The Cleveland, Ohio wing chun get-together was my idea, and it took place in May, 2003. A wing chun sifu from that city whose student used to post here volunteered his school for the weekend - and it was arranged.

But you should know that at that time this forum was in complete chaos in terms of wing chun lineage squabbling - and there were also numerous wing chunners posting day-after-day trying to counter some others (such as myself) who were constantly talking about the need to do real contact sparring.

I was simply trying to get people down to first base, (ie.- a wing chun get-together that was not going to be just some forms, chi sao, demos, and lots of talk, talk, talk)...

and so this was going to be a wing chun-only get together for actual sparring (and it did include contact sparring with protective gear)...

and even though the turnout was small, the weekend went pretty well, as far as it goes.

BUT IT WAS HARD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET THAT GOING - since there were plenty of people who didn't want to come if it did include contact sparring with headshots, etc.

So I knew that if it became a completely "open" affair the wing chun turnout would have been even smaller.

Was hoping that the idea would take off - and then at some point down the road we could have started inviting other stylists as well. And I made that clear on my posts as well.

Tried to follow it up about 6-7 months later with another get-together at my school here in Brooklyn at the time - but my landlord started giving me problems (she wouldn't fully commit to allowing us to have the room exclusively for an entire day - much less a whole weekend)...

so I had to cancel it.

[anerlich]

But you should know that at that time this forum was in complete chaos

It appears little has changed. Well, leave or learn to love the chaos, I guess.

My BJJ teacher teaches Muay Thai with some other Asian kickboxing blends in there as well. Every 6 months or so another local school, run by a former ranked MT fighter (also a blue belt under my BJJ teacher) has an open sparring day at his MT school where guys can come and spar a few rounds, and several schools in the city turn up.

There's no lineage wars, some school pride but little rivalry and no bad blood, everyone gets a little medal for participation, everyone goes home having learned something, minor bruises at worst but usually just a feeling of satisfaction.

Not much of this in TCMA or WC at least.

[Wayfaring]

The Cleveland, Ohio wing chun get-together was my idea, and it took place in May, 2003. A wing chun sifu from that city whose student used to post here volunteered his school for the weekend - and it was arranged.

But you should know that at that time this forum was in complete chaos in terms of wing chun lineage squabbling - and there were also numerous wing chunners posting day-after-day trying to counter some others (such as myself) who were constantly talking about the need to do real contact sparring.

I was simply trying to get people down to first base, (ie.- a wing chun get-together that was not going to be just some forms, chi sao, demos, and lots of talk, talk, talk)...

and so this was going to be a wing chun-only get together for actual sparring (and it did include contact sparring with protective gear)...

and even though the turnout was small, the weekend went pretty well, as far as it goes.

BUT IT WAS HARD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET THAT GOING - since there were plenty of people who didn't want to come if it did include contact sparring with headshots, etc.

So I knew that if it became a completely "open" affair the wing chun turnout would have been even smaller.

Was hoping that the idea would take off - and then at some point down the road we could have started inviting other stylists as well. And I made that clear on my posts as well.

Tried to follow it up about 6-7 months later with another get-together at my school here in Brooklyn at the time - but my landlord started giving me problems (she wouldn't fully commit to allowing us to have the room exclusively for an entire day - much less a whole weekend)...

so I had to cancel it.

It's all good, Victor. Getting together and mixing it up is good intentions. Organizing it is difficult. People make it or not. When it happens it's good times.

Somehow all the mouthy people over at Bullshido seem to pull of this concept - they do the mega-throwdowns once a year and localized ones get organized too. They have smaller turnout even at megas and smaller ones may be just 3-4 people. But they happen.

It seems that this group of mouthy people is unequal to that task. I don't know why.