Crosstraining & Wing Chun

[Ultimatewingchun]

I believe at least one of these vids was discussed on a different thread not too long ago, but the subject is worth repeating, imo, and perhaps expounded upon further.

So let's start with these two:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM57M8LBJqg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q74oxk65AZ4

What are the possibilities you see here?

And would those possibilities make any difference in your effectiveness as a fighter?

Are you doing anything right now similar to what you see here?

Or is your wing chun good enough as is?

[t_niehoff]

A general comment:

To develop fighting skill - regardless of our art- we need to fight. Fighting skill only comes from fighting (practice). A corollary of that is not only do we need to fight to develop fighting skill, but the quality of that fighting (the level of our opponents) is critical. You are only as good as your training/sparring partners.

So, I think it imperative that we get out and mix it up regularly and consistently with good, competent, nonWCK people -- MMAists, boxers, MT boxers, etc. Only in that way can we develop competent fighting skills.

And while this sort of training is necessary if we want to develop beyond a very low level, to develop skill in fighting with WCK, we need to actually fight with WCK. You only get good at what you practice. If you go train with boxers and box or go train with kickboxers and kickbox, then you are developing boxing or kickboxing skills, not WCK skills. You are not learning how to use your WCK.

In my view, WCK is an approach to fighting, a particular game. That game is an attached fighitng game, it is controlling the opponent while striking him. The tools of WCK, the kuit, the drills, etc. all point to WCK being an inside, contact-based fighting method. None of that is consistent with "kickboxing".

Yet, when I see WCK people "spar" what I see for the most part is outside, noncontact "kickboxing". In my view, these people don't have one of the fundamentals of WCK, the faat (the method, the game). And that's why when we see them spar, we don't see most of the tools of WCK come out (they are contact tools, so we can't expect to see them come out in noncontact fighting).

[Ultimatewingchun]

Terence,

I agree that you need to fight/spar constantly with your wing chun - in order to truly make the art work for you.

I agree that the higher the quality of the people you work against - the better you will get.

I agree that you need to do these things against people skilled in other arts - in order to truly make wing chun work for you.

I agree that this should include people skilled in things like MMA, boxing, Muay Thai. (And in fact, I would also include things like wrestling, BJJ, karate, and kickboxing).

I agree that wing chun is a very close quarter striking art. And while I wouldn't call it "an attached fighting game" - I do agree that wing chun is about controlling the opponent while striking him, as you put it, and I'll add: from very close quarters. And I like your term ,"an inside contact-based fighting method." So we don't have to split hairs, because I think so far we're basically talking about the same thing.

BUT HERE IS WHERE I DISAGREE: Fighting on the inside requires that you first get there - without getting busted up while trying to get in...and that you stay there...no closer, (ie.- takedown-to-ground)...and no further away (he recreates the longer distance space you momentarily might have taken away).

So I have issues when you go on to say this:

"Yet, when I see WCK people 'spar' what I see for the most part is outside, noncontact 'kickboxing'. In my view, these people don't have one of the fundamentals of WCK, the faat (the method, the game). And that's why when we see them spar, we don't see most of the tools of WCK come out (they are contact tools, so we can't expect to see them come out in noncontact fighting)."
.............................

***IMO, the erroneous assumption you make is that you can get to the "contact tools" range, as you put it - ONLY USING A CONTACT TOOL METHOD.

In fact, you contradict yourself when you write "they (WCK) are contact tools, so we can't expect to see them come out in noncontact fighting" - but then you also complain about the "kickboxing" look from noncontact range.

THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. You can't have it both ways.

But you have named the problem even if your conclusions don't add up. And the problem is often very noticable when watching a wing chun fighter spar just about anybody with longer range striking skills - but especially so if the opponent with the longer range game also has a longer reach due to his size.

Take another look at Aaron Baum's mma fight that was posted recently. And notice how many times he used longer range (boxing-type) round punches as a means to close the gap to the "contact range" - and also take note that he did it against someone his size. (And I applaud the fact that he did it while using some nice protection of his centerline - in terms of his hand positioning and his body alignment/structure).

But suppose his opponent was much taller. Or even if the opponent he did fight had demonstrated better boxing/kickboxing longer range skills. Imo, Aaron would have been forced to throw even more looping boxing-type punches (or perhaps longer reaching straight boxing type leads, or maybe he would have been forced to throw more kicks to bridge the gap - or perhaps he would have had to shoot for a clinch or a takedown more than he did).

So while I agree that often times wing chun sparring looks like a "kickboxing" match, I would say that it's not necessarily because they don't have the "fundamentals of WCK", as you put it; but rather they have yet to master the art of getting safely to the range where their "contact fighting" skills can work for them against a skilled, longer range striker.

And THAT ART doesn't really exist within WCK, per se. Now to be fair, methods of getting from non-contact to contact range do exist within certain limited WCK parameters - but those LIMITS are SIGNIFICANT when up against the very people you yourself advocate going up against.

[Edmund]

Take another look at Aaron Baum's mma fight that was posted recently. And notice how many times he used longer range (boxing-type) round punches as a means to close the gap to the "contact range" - and also take note that he did it against someone his size. (And I applaud the fact that he did it while using some nice protection of his centerline - in terms of his hand positioning and his body alignment/structure).

But suppose his opponent was much taller. Or even if the opponent he did fight had demonstrated better boxing/kickboxing longer range skills. Imo, Aaron would have been forced to throw even more looping boxing-type punches (or perhaps longer reaching straight boxing type leads, or maybe he would have been forced to throw more kicks to bridge the gap - or perhaps he would have had to shoot for a clinch or a takedown more than he did).


I think that other fight clip put up recently is a better example.
Alan's student Alex had a K1 fight in a cage and he KOed the guy in 2 rounds.

http://www.northernfightleague.co.uk/?page=movies&file=Judgement-14th_March-Fight_03-Wright_Vs_Jones

He didn't swing looping punches. He just kicked from a distance, punched straight with both hands when his opponent was in reach, and grabbed the neck and kneed the guy when it was close.

[Pacman]

A general comment:

To develop fighting skill - regardless of our art- we need to fight. Fighting skill only comes from fighting (practice). A corollary of that is not only do we need to fight to develop fighting skill, but the quality of that fighting (the level of our opponents) is critical. You are only as good as your training/sparring partners.

So, I think it imperative that we get out and mix it up regularly and consistently with good, competent, nonWCK people -- MMAists, boxers, MT boxers, etc. Only in that way can we develop competent fighting skills.

And while this sort of training is necessary if we want to develop beyond a very low level, to develop skill in fighting with WCK, we need to actually fight with WCK. You only get good at what you practice. If you go train with boxers and box or go train with kickboxers and kickbox, then you are developing boxing or kickboxing skills, not WCK skills. You are not learning how to use your WCK.

In my view, WCK is an approach to fighting, a particular game. That game is an attached fighitng game, it is controlling the opponent while striking him. The tools of WCK, the kuit, the drills, etc. all point to WCK being an inside, contact-based fighting method. None of that is consistent with "kickboxing".

Yet, when I see WCK people "spar" what I see for the most part is outside, noncontact "kickboxing". In my view, these people don't have one of the fundamentals of WCK, the faat (the method, the game). And that's why when we see them spar, we don't see most of the tools of WCK come out (they are contact tools, so we can't expect to see them come out in noncontact fighting).

WOW. terrence i actually agree with you 75%

its not that WC has no game plan for being on the outside, its that most schools train sticky hands all day (which is actually an advanced excercise) and never learn how apply sticky hands to a real situation where you are on the outside and you do not start at an attached and close state

its because of this that people often say sticky hands is useless or fantasy--because they never learned WC's outside game--they just chain punch from a distance (which is funny because chain punching is actually best used as an inside move)

so regarding crosstraining, its good to spar people from all styles, but if you decide to learn different styles it can be difficult if the fighting and training philosophies conflict.

[Pacman]

Terence,

I agree that you need to fight/spar constantly with your wing chun - in order to truly make the art work for you.
...
Take another look at Aaron Baum's mma fight that was posted recently. And notice how many times he used longer range (boxing-type) round punches as a means to close the gap to the "contact range" - and also take note that he did it against someone his size. (And I applaud the fact that he did it while using some nice protection of his centerline - in terms of his hand positioning and his body alignment/structure).


hi victor, to me aaron seemed to rush his opponent while throwing punches very stiffly. yes he was closing the gap with round punches, but he might as well have been chain punching--a technque often frowned upon. IMO he won the fight because he was in better shape than the other guy

ive read other people saying he 'controlled the center'. i really dont see it. he came straight at the guy. they shared the center. no one had control. on top of that his hands were held wide, at the shoulder. elbows werent protecting his center

please help me understand

[Liddel]

I only saw the first clip....



What are the possibilities you see here?

Aside from the type of Gor Sau / Lop sau drill round 4 mins this is very similar to how i train but without the round kicks and ground.

Blending the technique side of training with conditioning methods is great if you have the right balance and this is how you train a fighter vs a hobbiest IMO.



And would those possibilities make any difference in your effectiveness as a fighter?

Of course they would they have spontaneous resistance and functional training IMO. These guys are fighting by the looks :rolleyes: but they are lacking or rather have seperated that close range VT from the sparring to drilling IMO.



Are you doing anything right now similar to what you see here?

Like i said i dont have round kicks more stomps, no ground :o but most of the standup except for the drills where you recieve one action and give several back - that we dont do. everthing else i liked to see.



Or is your wing chun good enough as is?

If GSP is still training to get better at his level i dont think ill ever reach a stage where 'im good enough'... its a mindset IMO.

Good thread Vic...

Lets get back on topic though Pac, T. :rolleyes:

DREW

[Pacman]

And THAT ART doesn't really exist within WCK, per se. Now to be fair, methods of getting from non-contact to contact range do exist within certain limited WCK parameters - but those LIMITS are SIGNIFICANT when up against the very people you yourself advocate going up against.

IMO closing the gap is mostly about timing and angles. what tools do you need to close the gap that WC does not have?

[Ultimatewingchun]

"hi victor, to me aaron seemed to rush his opponent while throwing punches very stiffly. yes he was closing the gap with round punches, but he might as well have been chain punching--a technque often frowned upon. IMO he won the fight because he was in better shape than the other guy

ive read other people saying he 'controlled the center'. i really dont see it. he came straight at the guy. they shared the center. no one had control. on top of that his hands were held wide, at the shoulder. elbows werent protecting his center

please help me understand" (Pacman)

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

***THE EFFECT of Aaron's looping punches are NOT the same as chain punching, because chain punches can be more easily timed, and the positioning of the arms/hands well accounted for when trying to time and counter them, ie.- you basically know where each punch is coming from and where they're going, and what the rhythm/speed of the attacking punches are...and therefore, with big looping round punches of your own, and some sidestepping or ducking (and possibly with tight hooks as well)...you can strike/go AROUND the area used by the chain puncher - and this can be especially effective if your arms are longer than the chain puncher's arms.

Aaron protected center (somewhat) by the positioning of his elbows near his sides, ie.- near his ribs..if not directly at (or very near) his centerline, per se, and even though his arms were not extended further out into the typical WCK jong sao position. This positioning can work from longer non-contact range - and still be considered, imo, to be within the parameters of "wing chun fighting", in theory. Why not? The control came, imo, as a result of his looping punches (while protecting center)...being able to pressure the opponent - due to the strong body alignment/rush/footwork behind the punches - which also added power to his attempts to gain control. And when up against the opponent he faced in this match, for the most part it worked.

And btw, here's a look at Aaron's fight for those of you who haven't seen it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49tbIUy5Qd0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gR3beL5CWo

[Pacman]

i understand what you are saying about his round punches not being the same as chain punches

my point about that is that he basically just blitzed the guy with a flurry of punches much like others i see winning matches by blitzing an opponent with chain punches.

im not trying to be a d1ck but i think we can say that rushing an opponent straight on throwing punches isn't a very skilled tactic.

to me, his arms were pretty darn far away from his center. you cant really get ****her out than that.

[mjw]

As my favorite WSL quote is something like be a master of the art not a slave to the art.

SO take what works for you. Then as for cross training if it's going to helpo you win then do it. I do both Wing Chun & BJJ and i think they compliment eachother nicely in regards to structure, balance, keeping pressure on the oponent etc etc.

[Edmund]

hi victor, to me aaron seemed to rush his opponent while throwing punches very stiffly. yes he was closing the gap with round punches, but he might as well have been chain punching--a technque often frowned upon. IMO he won the fight because he was in better shape than the other guy


I don't think so. The other guy was beaten up. That's what wore him down.


ive read other people saying he 'controlled the center'. i really dont see it. he came straight at the guy. they shared the center. no one had control. on top of that his hands were held wide, at the shoulder. elbows werent protecting his center

Once he *got* in contact he was controlling the center. He grabbed the neck or controlled the guy's arm or deeply underhooked. This prevented the guy from getting much offence in the clinch. The guy was turning his back in the clinch. Aaron was able to land good strikes in the clinch and got takedowns from there which let him ground and pound.

[grasshopper 2.0]

I totally agree with you. I do think wing chun has limited itself or is taught in a general sense that implicitly teaches a restrictive fighting method (sticky hands all the time, cooperative partners, "cool moves" performed at close range). But i don't think it's meant to be that way.

Sure we can look to other arts..but for me, it's used to better understand wing chun better, rather than doing the other art to deal with that situation. It's about giving yourself the opportunity to train against a non-wing chun punch or kick using wing chun...which is extremely rare in the wing chun kwoon. or to understand body mechanics, timing etc from a different perspective...to improve one's wing chun solutions.

Do you think a MMA, boxer, karateka, etc would drop what they're doing to learn wing chun if they came across some wing chun guy who was able to wipe them? or do you think they'd train their karate, or boxing more to deal with wing chun practitioner?




A general comment:

To develop fighting skill - regardless of our art- we need to fight. Fighting skill only comes from fighting (practice). A corollary of that is not only do we need to fight to develop fighting skill, but the quality of that fighting (the level of our opponents) is critical. You are only as good as your training/sparring partners.

So, I think it imperative that we get out and mix it up regularly and consistently with good, competent, nonWCK people -- MMAists, boxers, MT boxers, etc. Only in that way can we develop competent fighting skills.

And while this sort of training is necessary if we want to develop beyond a very low level, to develop skill in fighting with WCK, we need to actually fight with WCK. You only get good at what you practice. If you go train with boxers and box or go train with kickboxers and kickbox, then you are developing boxing or kickboxing skills, not WCK skills. You are not learning how to use your WCK.

In my view, WCK is an approach to fighting, a particular game. That game is an attached fighitng game, it is controlling the opponent while striking him. The tools of WCK, the kuit, the drills, etc. all point to WCK being an inside, contact-based fighting method. None of that is consistent with "kickboxing".

Yet, when I see WCK people "spar" what I see for the most part is outside, noncontact "kickboxing". In my view, these people don't have one of the fundamentals of WCK, the faat (the method, the game). And that's why when we see them spar, we don't see most of the tools of WCK come out (they are contact tools, so we can't expect to see them come out in noncontact fighting).

[Phil Redmond]

hi victor, to me aaron seemed to rush his opponent while throwing punches very stiffly. yes he was closing the gap with round punches, but he might as well have been chain punching--a technique often frowned upon. IMO he won the fight because he was in better shape than the other guy

ive read other people saying he 'controlled the center'. i really dont see it. he came straight at the guy. they shared the center. no one had control. on top of that his hands were held wide, at the shoulder. elbows weren't protecting his center

please help me understand
Sports teams have game plans or plays. But so does the other team. So one teams plan may or may not work against another team who wants to win as much as the other team. The same goes for fighters. To many people criticize a fight expecting to see a perfectly choreographed kung fu movie fight scene. Boxers aren't trained to use wild swinging punches but I've seen them do it under pressure or when tired. From what I see Alex stayed within WC and controlled the center as much as he could. I used to criticize fighters and say that he should have done this or that until I got hit really hard by a kick boxer named Jonas Nunez. You do what you can under pressure.
I say get into a ring/cage and fight someone. Not your classmate, buddy or whatever, but someone bent on crushing you. You'll see that you won't be able to pull off perfect techniques all the time.

[sanjuro_ronin]

IF WC is a principle based system then, as long as the principles are respected, what it "looks like" is totally irrelevant.

[grasshopper 2.0]

Ronin: agreed! A roundhouse kick can be wing chun as much as a chain punch...

[sihing]

IF WC is a principle based system then, as long as the principles are respected, what it "looks like" is totally irrelevant.

WSL had a fight, the other guy lowered his head, he knee'd him and that was that. Fellow students watching critized WSL for using knee, "where is that technique in the forms??", to which WSL said, I used the closest weapon to the nearest target, that is Wing Chun.

enough said....

JR

[Phil Redmond]

IF WC is a principle based system then, as long as the principles are respected, what it "looks like" is totally irrelevant.
Exactly, yet people still say "that didn't look like WC"

[Pacman]

Sports teams have game plans or plays. But so does the other team. So one teams plan may or may not work against another team who wants to win as much as the other team. The same goes for fighters. To many people criticize a fight expecting to see a perfectly choreographed kung fu movie fight scene. Boxers aren't trained to use wild swinging punches but I've seen them do it under pressure or when tired. From what I see Alex stayed within WC and controlled the center as much as he could. I used to criticize fighters and say that he should have done this or that until I got hit really hard by a kick boxer named Jonas Nunez. You do what you can under pressure.
I say get into a ring/cage and fight someone. Not your classmate, buddy or whatever, but someone bent on crushing you. You'll see that you won't be able to pull off perfect techniques all the time.


agreed. you know what, i didnt say i could do better or anything like that. i definitely do not expect a perfectly choreographed fight--i for one know what pressure can do to you as that was a huge obstacle for me at first.

regardless of this, i think its perfectly reasonable to critique a person's fight for your benefit and for his. my teacher and my sihings critique me all the time.

i was objectively talking about the comments regarding to aaron controlling the center. all things aside, was he controlling the center? thats what i was asking.

[Pacman]

IF WC is a principle based system then, as long as the principles are respected, what it "looks like" is totally irrelevant.

i dont know who this is in response to, but *thumbs up*


Exactly, yet people still say "that didn't look like WC"

i use that phrase. i guess im not being specific, but when i say that i mean "my focal receptors alerted me that those moves and those techniques violate WC principles"

[Phil Redmond]

. . . i use that phrase. i guess im not being specific, but when i say that i mean "my focal receptors alerted me that those moves and those techniques violate WC principles"
But you're assuming that you know all WC principles from all lineages. Like Sihing said about Sibak WSL using a knee and someone saying that it wasn't WC. It was the closest weapon to the closest target and he won. We have a jump in our BJD form. Most people laugh and it and I understand why. But if a sword, staff, chain whip, or whatever was swung at my ankles I wouldn't just stand there because I thought it violated WC principles.

[Ultimatewingchun]

what I'm about to say?

On this "CROSSTRAINING AND WING CHUN" thread?
On the "SIMULTANEOUS BLOCKS + STRIKES DON'T WORK" thread?
On the "HOW DO YOU GET TO THE WING CHUN FINAL PRODUCT" thread?

Answer: On all of them.

Even though, at first glance, it looks as though it belongs most of all on the "SIMULTANEOUS BLOCKS + STRIKES DON'T WORK" thread. Where there's this big discussion going on about chain punches, and whether or not throwing 6-7-8 at top speed will do this? Will prove that?

No, just 2-3 at the most, before something else will be called for in the fight. Or something else will be forced upon you, ie.- your opponent clinches. And the key word here is FIGHT.

Fighting requires hitting people with power, kicking them with power, knees amd elbows the same thing. Ditto for takedowns, sweeps, shots to the legs, arm locks, neck cranks, chokes, etc.

Oh yeah, did I mention that you need power on your pak sao also? On your bong sao? (Better not let it collapse against your body when receiving a very powerful punch - even if you are trying to re-direct it). Did I mention the importance of power on your bil sao? Your lop sao? Your garn sao?

Otherwise, you're taking a big chance that you're going to get mauled - if it's a real fight. Or if it's a serious sparring match against a serious opponent.

Throw out the rule book, if the one you've been given pooh-poohs power. Hit with power. When using the wing chun vertical punch. Make each one count. Make each one hurt. For real. Not possible if you're going for speed and want to show people that you can hit them six times in less than two seconds.

And if it means throwing a big rear cross - that's what you do. A big left hook, that's what you do.

"Whoa?! That's not wing chun?!" Someone in your wing chun school just said to you after you dropped someone with a big left hook, or a very karate-looking rear front kick to the other guys' mid-section.

They don't know what they're talking about.

[Pacman]

But you're assuming that you know all WC principles from all lineages. Like Sihing said about Sibak WSL using a knee and someone saying that it wasn't WC. It was the closest weapon to the closest target and he won. We have a jump in our BJD form. Most people laugh and it and I understand why. But if a sword, staff, chain whip, or whatever was swung at my ankles I wouldn't just stand there because I thought it violated WC principles.

i understand what you are saying and it makes sense, but i was under the impression that protecting your center was pretty fundamental to WC regardless of lineage

i also thought that keeping centerline control (and not sharing the center) was also pretty fundamental.

[Phil Redmond]

i understand what you are saying and it makes sense, but i was under the impression that protecting your center was pretty fundamental to WC regardless of lineage

i also thought that keeping centerline control (and not sharing the center) was also pretty fundamental.
You are correct though sometimes you have to control your central line while facing your center line away from your opponent.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Exactly, yet people still say "that didn't look like WC"

Well, to be honest, typically you can tell what someone does by how they fight.
CLF guys for example like their swinging punches and such, TKD guys kick a certain way, as do MT guys and Karate fighters, typically look like Karate fighters.
WC tends to only look like WC when it is done VS WC, probably because"
1- The majority of WC people train and fight vs other WC people.
2-WC is typically trained VS WC.
These aren't excuses, they are valid reasons.
When Karate was first exposed to MT or Boxing or went full contact, it ended up not looking like Karate, not only because the opponent wasn't doing Karate, to which the karateka was used to facing, but also because the Karateka was not used to going full contact with his karate.
What happened?
Karate learned to go full contact and learned to go VS other systems and, gradually, karate began looking like karate again.

This will happen to WC eventually.

[k gledhill]

The concepts of the system are guiding an attacking defensive response...

Attacking

How to be able to attack for 9 out of 10 second engagement [example time] ...

the techniques we develop are for this ability, to have a constant flowing attack...

Flowing

Whatever happens in that flow to keep the pressure and dominate is conceptually driven
with guidelines to optimize your ability....[see other threads :D]

whatever happens to be available in the attack /concept/ flow ....

A guy takes a swing at you from too far so you low front kick him with enough force to lift him off his feet , he hits a wall behind him and falls to the sidewalk, as he tries to get back up you kick him in the head, like soccer ..ko. foot is nearest to target

You defend yourself & hit a guy , then po-pai him down a staircase of a nightclub , the flow went that direction ...so did he.

A guy swears at you , grabs your extended wrists and charges you, you instantly feel the power surges of his attempts to shove you into a wall behind you, you feel for the surge moment & turn and now he is where you were and gets slammed into the wall and trapped from escaping....not a planned technique but you improvise from chi-sao training...

I never used a atan sao as a block in 25 years of fighting :D or a bong, or a huen...
but kicks, punches, palms, elbows, ..er soccer kicks , stairs, walls ...feeling a song coming on , regrets , Ive had a few , but to few to mention ...and now...

I did it my way ! :D

[Liddel]

IF WC is a principle based system then, as long as the principles are respected, what it "looks like" is totally irrelevant.

I think the general look is important. Going out on a limb here but.....

I think there is a big grey area. My issue is with people wanting to limit themselves with tags titles and lables.

IMO WC is a fighting art defined by specific body mechanics supported by theories and principals linking mechanics to a fighting strategy.

Most systems could fall into this discrption.

Therefore if you use actions which are foreign to the specifc body mechanics you train regardless of principals or theories adhered to, you arent utilising WC.

and theres no problem with that !

Why people insist that actions like round kicks are WC if they adhere to theories or principals is beyond me. as long as it works titles are irrelevant.

Theories and principals by there very nature are universal IMO, i.e you can apply a WC principal to another styles mechanic, but body mechanics are style specific, sure there is cross over between styles but they are in the minority to actions that are specific to one style.

So using actions that arent specifically WC mechanics is totally ok but IMHO to insist that it is WC rather than calling it 'joe bloggs WC' is silly and ignorant of what the crux of WC is.

Sure this idea gets blurred because there are so many differnet WC lineages and some have actions foreign to other lineages and so forth, but there are certain fundamentals i.e elbow behaviour that have to be present to really still be soley WC.

If you have round kicks with a different mechanic to the WC side kick then say you have a mix bag, no big deal.

The irony IMO is, even with the state of the WC reputation (being negitive in the MA community) people still insist on calling what they use WC when its far from it...WTF ?
:p

I think cross training great but i dont BS people when they say what was that ? if ive learnt a habbit from sparring / fighting and its not from My VT toolbox.. then i say i was just improvising :) simple

DREW

[Pacman]

You are correct though sometimes you have to control your central line while facing your center line away from your opponent.

to me that sounds like your opponent now has the center. your opponent is now facing you at an angle, and you are not facing your opponent

[Pacman]

excellent post, liddel

i think your post helped clarify the situation

there are two issues here that people are lumping together into one argument.

1. what constitutes WC
2. what "works"

a lot of people here confuse what constitutes WC and using "what works" for them.

if a jump spin kick works for you then so be it. use it

but that doesnt make it WC, even if there is some weak connection that you can make by citing some kuen kuit

i read a lot of posts where people make huge stretches and leaps trying to qualify certain things as WC and to me that is ridiculous.

however it is not ridiculous to say "that worked for him".

for example the baum fight was not WC at all. and a lot of people try to say it is. that doesnt mean he doesnt get props for winning and being a talented fighter. im just saying its not WC

[Ultimatewingchun]

Here's part one of several posts that are meant to be digested together. Let me state at the outset that they are not meant to be some sort of "Let's-admire-Bruce Lee" fest. No.

This thread is entitled CROSSTRAINING & WING CHUN, and that's why the next four posts are being made, even if what's here might be troubling to some. It's about what works, not what's politically correct on a wing chun forum.

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

"Bruce Lee Was The Best Of His Time"
by Gene LeBell

Both Bruce Lee and Gene LeBell incurred the wrath of traditionalists because they attempted to modify the arts they learned to create a more functional way of fighting.

I met Bruce Lee for the first time during the filming of the television show The Green Hornet, on which he played a butler. He was a nice fellow. The stunt coordinator hired me, and I worked on quite a few episodes. During that time, I was able to get to know Bruce a little bit, and we even worked out together. He was the best martial artist of his time.

Bruce and I had a bond with the martial arts, and we would get together frequently. We worked out about 10 to 12 times at his place in Los Angeles' Chinatown and at my place. When I went to his place, he showed me what he did, and I showed him what I did. Although he seemed to love the finishing holds of grappling, it just wasn't commercially attractive at the time. Actually. it was because of my grappling and tumbling background that I was hired to do the television show-because I could take falls for Bruce.

Bruce is more famous now than he was when he was alive. He was an entertaining fellow who was very knowledgeable and very good at what he did. People may wonder just how good a martial artist Bruce Lee was. Well, as I said earlier. he was the best of his time. Also, many of his former students are doing very well today. That's a sign that he was a good martial artist and that he was able to make his students into good martial artists.

Bruce developed and performed his own style of kung fu. and a lot of the traditional guys didn't like it because it broke from Chinese tradition. I know what that is like because I had the same trouble when I tried to improve different martial arts by changing things for the better. I believe that anytime you can have an open mind and learn something new, then add It to Your repertoire, it's a good thing. It will only make You and your students more knowledgeable.

At first Bruce was not particularly receptive to the grappling art that I practiced, but he eventually warmed up to it somewhat. I thought that was great. I've always been a big believer in crosstraining, and I've practiced most of the major martial arts, as well as boxing and wrestling. I believe that a person who is involved with the martial arts should know as Much as he can about all styles. The martial artists that I disagree with are the ones that know only their art ' they don't know anything about other styles and they don't like anything else.

As I said, Bruce started out with sort of a negative opinion of grappling. but after we worked out. he demonstrated that he had an open mind when he acknowledged how practical it was for certain things; in certain situations". Some of the techniques I shared with him were leg locks, arm locks, hold downs and judo throws.

Bruce and I didn't agree on everything. For example. I've always been a believer in bobbing and weaving to avoid an opponent's punches - instead of blocking with your hands. Bruce's theory was to block a punch and then, strike back with your open hand or fist. My point of view was that it You can avoid absorbing blows in a match or a fight. - and then come in with offensive moves, You'll live a lot longer.

Although no one in the martial arts community today seems to have the same charisma that Bruce had, there are many great martial artists Out there teaching and competing. This statement is not intended to take anything away from Bruce. He was a leader and trendsetter. I wish he were still with us today.

About the Author. Gene LeBell is a stuntman, former American Athletic Union judo champion, professional wrestler and world-renowned grappling instructor. "
You have ignored this user.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Part of a Joe Lewis interview by former world champ Muay Thai fighter Mike Miles.

Interviews-
Joe Lewis

"MM: How long did you work with Bruce Lee for?

JL: I worked with him for about a year and a half.

MM: How much influence did Bruce have on your Martial Arts ability?

JL: A lot of influence. We also had many common interests; like we both loved boxing.

MM: How did the two of you share this interest?

JL: We used to watch fight films together. We would watch certain fighters, and try to learn what we could from the best. For example we would watch the defense of Jack Johnson. We would watch the explosiveness of Jack Dempsey. We would watch the footwork of Willie Pep and Sammy Saddler.

MM: How fast was Bruce?

JL: He was the fastest man who ever stood in front of me.

MM: What were his weak points?

JL: Kicking and defense were his weakest points. When I first met him he had a few low line Wing Chun kicks. They were not very effective though. As he started watching tournament competition in the 1960s he would start learning and using techniques from them. He learned many techniques from watching me.

MM: Really?

JL: Yes, Bruce had films of me in competition. He studied my stance and my kicking from films of me fighting people like Louis Delgado and Thomas LaPuppet.

MM: What did Bruce like about you, and why did he train with you?

JL: He liked the fact that I too trained like a fanatic. He liked my side stance which he used in movies, and he also liked the fact that I was built well.

MM: You now teach using theories. Most people are not as thorough at this compared to you when they perform seminars. Did you learn this all from Bruce Lee?

JL: I figured a lot of this out myself, but a lot more came from Bruce Lee. He was very analytical at that time and had a better conceptual faculty than me. He also had great assistance from a boxing manual that came out in the 1940s. It was a book that dealt with the centerline, etc. His Tao of Jeet Kune Do used a lot of theories on fighting from this book.

MM: What were some of the results of you two working together?

JL: Together with my fighting principles and his we probably created around 30 fighting principles. For example, I could talk about the different types of speed; timing speed, intitial speed, acceleration speed, etc. Different types of mind set; focusing, aspects of focusing, target retention, etc. When I first started the Martial Arts the Orientals and the Asians could not conceptualize. I don't know if they were ignorant or thought Americans were stupid, or if they did not know any better. But I noticed one thing, they were not fighting a lot. So I figured the Americans were more interested in fighting, whereas the Orientals would push kata, etc. When it came to fighting, the Orientals did not have much to say, and they did not seem very smart. I always felt fighting was first, and then they created styles, waza's, pre-set things and all that other stuff later. For me, traditional Martial Arts went back to fighting.

MM: How about your training with Bruce?

JL: Bruce liked contact and would put on gloves. I didn't like it because he would put on the kendo style gloves that the JKD guys now wear. They are dangerous because those gloves will cut you to pieces. I also did not like laces because if they were loose, you could lose an eye and I had seen that before; same as velcro.

MM: Any thoughts on Jeet Kune Do?

JL: The Jeet Kune Do fighters are too stiff. Their theory is to put the strong side forward. This never made sense to me because does it mean only one side has power and the other does not?

MM: What did Bruce teach you, self-defense theory or ring theory?

JL: A little bit of both. He was gravitating towards Thai boxing.

MM: What did he know about Thai boxing?

JL: Bruce was not a very good kicker in the beginning. He used a lot of Wing Chun style kicks. However, he learned to do the roundhouse kick. He eventually started turning the hip. Many well know Thai instructors feel Bruce learned this from their style. Bruce then learned his hook (heel) kicks from Chuck Norris and his students.

In terms of Thai boxing, Bruce had no elbows and did not have any knee maneuvers. While punching, Bruce would try and hook off of his Wing Chun punches, but he still was not sitting down in his punches like a pro boxer. I would say in another five years he would have looked like a neo MuayThai stylist.

In regards to his students, most of his guys could never execute when it came to fighting. I could, and what I did was throw 90% of the useless techniques away and use aspects like explosiveness, bridging the gap, setting the guy up, angular attack, hands up, straight punches, move the hands before the body. Using all of these principles, I made it applicable to ring fighting. The JKD guys would not put the gloves on and spar for real. They would only tap each other and not go for it thinking they would get hurt. How can you get hurt when you are wearing a mouth guard, large puffy gloves, and a head gear? You do not get hurt in this stuff, unless you are being used as a piece of meat by a professional. Truthfully, I have seen more guys get hurt in traditional Karate than I have in Kickboxing. Kickboxers and boxers are trained to take or roll with a strike.

MM: My understanding of where Bruce and JKD was going is different than what is being taught now by his disciples. Is this an accurate comment?

JL: Bruce was moving in the direction of Kickboxing at the time, though it was a very rigid form. Suffice it to say it was less and less like JKD that is portrayed today and more like Kickboxing.

MM: Bruce had a background in Wing Chun, so what about the hand trapping drills from that style?

JL: He was moving away from that and thought it was nonsense. Bruce used to say to me that it belonged in the past. Personally very little of that is effective. Traditional boxing has some trapping techniques that I use once in awhile that are effective. But the Wing Chun stuff does not work against a good fighter like a boxer. You do not even see a lot of trapping in boxing because boxers believe if you have time to trap, then you have time to hit. Once in awhile it may be all right to trap and hit but the multiple or continuous trapping is not practical or functional. Against a good amateur boxer, the boxer will take your head off if you start trying that stuff. My trapping may go as far as to set up a pivot or a spin to the side.

MM: From my research it seems to me Bruce was a little insecure. Maybe he felt when he was working with you that he did not want to teach you trapping because it kept him one step ahead of you in ability. Any thoughts on this?

JL: Bruce was not insecure. Our goals were different; whereas I wanted to be the best at fighting, Bruce wanted to be the first Oriental Superstar. Bruce Lee was not stupid. He was constantly trying to upgrade his JKD. Read what he had to say. There are many contradictions. Why block or trap when you can strike. Bruce was very intelligent when it came to fighting, and that was why he was going to get away from the trapping and the techniques of Wing Chun."

[Ultimatewingchun]

Q&A WITH LARRY HARTSELL
Robert W. Young

"BB: What interest did Lee have in grappling?

Hartsell: Before his death, he had added 33 grappling moves to the jeet kune do concept.

BB: He got those from Gene LeBell and Wally Jay?

Hartsell: Wally Jay, Gene LeBell and Hayward Nishioka. And he had some chin-na and silat. He would mix the arts. He would enter to trapping and take down into a submission. If you read Tao of Jeet Kune Do, you'll see those grappling moves."

[Ultimatewingchun]

Also a part from the Joe Lewis interview by former world Muay Thai champ Mike Miles.
Interviews-
Joe Lewis

"MM: Did Bruce do any grappling?

JL: He was going down and working with 'Judo' Gene LeBell. If you look at Wing Chun they have sets where a guy comes at you, you trap and sweep the guy to the ground. What Bruce learned from 'Judo' Gene he used in the movie 'Game of Death' where he put a crank, or I think it is called a guillotine, on Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Bruce was starting to get into it."

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


***I SUSPECT that the "set" Joe Lewis refers to might be the wooden dummy sequence that uses a sweep.

[Pacman]

according to this interview, it sounds like bruce was a fanatical guy on a mission to learn how to fight who was in great physical shape.

but it also sounds like he was majorly lacking in some areas (at least according to this guy). so why the hell should anyone care what he thinks?

[Knifefighter]

Because Bruce did almost zero actual grappling sparring, his grappling/ground fighting knowledge was very limited.

[Phil Redmond]

to me that sounds like your opponent now has the center. your opponent is now facing you at an angle, and you are not facing your opponent
What center would the opponent have? Definitley not mine.
Since you probably aren't familiar with the TWC "centraL line" theory I can see where you're coming from.

[Phil Redmond]

to me that sounds like your opponent now has the center. your opponent is now facing you at an angle, and you are not facing your opponent
TWC central line (not to be confused with center line)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdOmnxmnfv8&feature=channel_page

[Pacman]

What center would the opponent have? Definitley not mine.
Since you probably aren't familiar with the TWC "centraL line" theory I can see where you're coming from.

the bottom line is that your opponent is facing you. you are not facing your opponent. how is that good for you and not good for your opponent?

[AdrianK]

according to this interview, it sounds like bruce was a fanatical guy on a mission to learn how to fight who was in great physical shape.

but it also sounds like he was majorly lacking in some areas (at least according to this guy). so why the hell should anyone care what he thinks?


Show me a fighter who isn't lacking in some area or another. Martial arts and fighting is a growth process. Bruce may have never progressed to the level that some of the top MMA fighters have, in terms of fighting ability, but he still had an extremely deep grasp on things.

In comparison to the state of martial arts today, where most schools are utter bull****.

That being said, most of the top people in CMA are severely lacking in some aspect of their fighting abilities.



the bottom line is that your opponent is facing you. you are not facing your opponent. how is that good for you and not good for your opponent?

There are vulnerabilities in every aspect of fighting.
The central line concept opens up options, but it also leaves you vulnerable in other ways.

This goes for everything in martial arts.

Why would you want to lift up your leg and kick, if your opponent can just grab your leg and take you down?

Well, we've seen proper executions of both.

The same goes for Central Line. Understand the benefits, understand the weaknesses, develop the ideas of what you can do from that position, and what your opponent can't do.

Then go from there. If it doesn't work out, throw it away. Some people just don't get certain concepts. Not everyone can be a superstar grappler, a superstar boxer, or a superstar kickboxer. We're good in some things and bad in others. We train the things we're good at to be GREAT at them and train the things we're bad at to be GOOD at them. If we're lucky we can train the things that used to be bad, all the way up to great. But I honestly think most people don't have the capability or rather, the drive to do so.

[Phil Redmond]

the bottom line is that your opponent is facing you. you are not facing your opponent. how is that good for you and not good for your opponent?
Like I said earlier. You obviously aren't familiar with the TWC central line. I can "face" my opponent without facing with my center line. But the bottom line is that we compete with that theory and win.

[Pacman]

Show me a fighter who isn't lacking in some area or another.

the difference is that we do not immortalize those fighters and regard everything they say as holy.

as for "central line", if it works for you great!

[Ultimatewingchun]

and it's exerpts from a current thread on the UG (Underground) forum.

CARLSON GRACIE and WING CHUN vid...is the title of the thread and it starts with this vid - actually, it picks up from exactly 2:00 into the vid....

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

"Sorry, dunno if this has been posted before but I saw this the other day and thought it was interesting; I have always thought the grappling based fighters should add some Wing Chun elements in their game, which will mostly help them neutralise and put a striker's game off ."
.............................................

"I studied Wing Chun for 7 years before getting into jiu jitsu, I don't think Wing Chun gets enough attention these days but unless someone wins a title claiming Wing Chun as their base it will remain as an obscure useless art around here."
...............................................

What elements?
..............................................

"Elements like trapping the elbow, parrying (see Machida if you dont buy into it) and attacking your opponents blind side... "
...............................................

"Trapping the elbow has always struck me as completely retarded against guys with some idea of what they are doing. nobody good will let you circle him and trap his arm....

and attacking the blind side (circling) and parrying are ideas that are already in any striking art."
................................................

"No need to circle someone to trap the elbow; I'm not talking crazy kung fu movie moves. Machida uses this to some extent. He is always looking for that left elbow to extend (bad idea to jab him) so that he can trap it and throw that straight
................................................

"And attacking the blind side (circling) and parrying are ideas that are already in any striking art."
................................................

"Sure enough and with good reason. The thing is WC really concentrates on those two ideas (and I think for the most part WC is well thought of), so since you would agree they are good tools to possess, then why wouldn't it be worth it for someone with a grappling base to add them to his game?

WC is about constant movement, parrying strikes instead of avoiding or blocking them, economy of action and the right angle off attack; IMO very compatible with what grapplers want to do."
................................................

"Wing chun element I think is most useful from a grappling pov - sticky hands."
..............................................

(QUOTING).... "WC is about constant movement, parrying strikes instead of avoiding or blocking them..."

(RESPONSE TO QUOTE): ***THAT'S INTERESTING, because I would think countering while completely avoiding an attack would be the most efficient response to an attack, in terms of time and energy use.

But that's just my opinion.

Any hooks uppercuts or elbows in wing chun? Locks and throws? I do know most TCMA have locks and throws."
.................................................. .....

"I practiced Wing Chun for a year, and I honestly think that the straight-punches thrown from the inside would be an effective tool in MMA. The method of punching that is taught in Wing Chun is extremely fast and unorthadox; (think Vitor Belfort when it comes to speed)."
.................................................. ......

"If an MMA practitioner found a way to successfully incorporate elements of Wing Chun into MMA, we could be seeing another Lyoto Machida. IMO"
.................................................. ......

"I am definitely not saying that people should stop trying to block or duck etc. Especially if you are a striker who likes to stand in the pocket, then constantly looking for the parry would most likely get you into a world of trouble.

I am thinking (mostly) of the wrestler types who want to close in as harmlessly as possible. In those cases blocking or avoiding is extremely difficult since your arms are usually extended (think of shooting singles and doubles) and your body is already in forward motion.

However, there are instances when even the striker can benefit from a well timed parry with a simultaneous punch. Fighters who like to throw that wild hook from afar (e.g. Wanerlei, Franklin etc.) would be easy pickings for a well trained fighter who knows how to parry the hook.

As for hooks and uppercuts yes WC does incorporate them but only in close quarters; i.e. clinch range. Locks, throws and elbows are also present in the system."
.................................................. ...

"The concept of Wing Chun is very cool. It's only the training method that is in question."
.................................................. ...

"I couldn't agree more. The outdated and overly conservative Chinese approach is seriously faulty. I mean, for example (and there are many like it), William Cheung wants his students to start learning ground fighting upon reaching level 8 or 9 dont really remember exactly; it takes years to get to that level in his system...."

***AND RIGHT HERE, I (Victor Parlati) have to say that I've never heard of any such thing coming from William Cheung, and I've been his student since 1983.
.................................................. ...

QUOTING...."That's interesting, because I would think countering while completely avoiding an attack would be the most efficient response to an attack, in terms of time and energy use."

(RESPONSE TO QUOTE): ***WHEN they talk about avoiding they usually mean taking yourself out of range of the opponent's attack so that a counter attack is also out of range and not possible. Parrying means redirecting so that the person being attacked is still in range to counter. He still 'avoids' the attack, but remains inside a specific range."

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . as for "central line", if it works for you great!
Yes, I agree. I believe in using what works. You may have something I can use. I'm not too proud to learn from anyone.

[Pacman]

Yes, I agree. I believe in using what works. You may have something I can use. I'm not too proud to learn from anyone.

ah yes thats very polite of you, phil. maybe on another thread which i will name :), "WHY CENTRAL LINE SUCKS". im just totally kidding!

[Liddel]

Show me a fighter who isn't lacking in some area or another.

http://www.mmaoutsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/emelianenkofedor21.jpg

http://www.sportsnet.ca/mma/2008/05/23/st_pierre_georges_belt_zuffa_260.jpg

:p :cool:

Couldnt help it... and im starting to regret my forum handle LOL :)

DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay, I'm going to talk about what crosstraining and wing chun means to me, personally. And let me apologize in advance for the fact that I don't have any vids yet to supplement the following remarks with a visual. But yet is the keyword in that sentence, for I intend to put a bunch of new vids up as time goes on.

I'm going to talk about what I like to refer to as THE TOP 30...and by that I mean the 30 most important moves to know as a fighter - and I'm not getting into any weapons and multiple opponents scenarios with this, as that would increase the number considerably. For the moment, I'm talking strictly about unarmed combat.

Furthermore, when I talk about THE TOP 30, I'm actually talking about 60, since I also preach to my students that they must know adequate defenses against each of these moves as well.

"But wing chun is a concept based art, not a technique based art"...we hear so often. And when you talk about 30 "moves" - you're really talking about 30 techniques, so you're violating a major - perhaps the major - element of wing chun.

Now while I believe that wing chun is very much a concept-based art, and clearly more so than many (if not most) other martial arts, nonetheless, I find the "wing chun is concept-based and not technique based" argument to be a false argument - as if it's not possible to have set techniques in your arsenal and at the same time be very fluid and spontaneous in your expression of all of your techniques, fighting strategies, and the concepts and principles behind all of this...

and that spontaneous fluidity is arguably the single most important element (dare I say "attribute"?) that one learns in double arm chi sao, for example.

SO I FIND IT TO BE A FALSE DICHOTOMY: you can have both.

Not only can you have both, imo, you must have both.

And I've made it clear by now that, imo, wing chun is not only primarily a close quarter standup striking art, but that precisely because of this, wing chun can also use some longer range "help" - both as weaponry to do damage with and as a delivery system to the preferred very close quarter wing chun fighting range (distance)...

and that help, for me, is longer range boxing straight leads, rear crosses, boxing (and kickboxing/JKD) type footwork, longer range kicks, etc., as well as "help" at very close quarters wherein strikes are not easy to come by, ie.- wrestling/grappling clinch work, (elbows and knees of course) - some of which does exists in wing chun - but some Muay Thai clearly needs to be investigated/used in this area, imo...

some sweeps, takedowns, and even wrestling shoots to the legs...and some true wrestling/grappling groundwork...and not simply some anti-grappling mumbo jumbo - or some "now I'll show you how wing chun works on the ground using the centerline, etc". Yeah, there are some things from wing chun that can be worked into your ground game, but if this is your only ground game - LOL.

NOW I'M TALKING PRIMARILY ABOUT ACTUAL FIGHTING WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE TOP 30...

and not just sparring, a match or a tournament setting. Things that I believe are absolutely essential to know about in a streetfight without weapons...(or an all-out sparring match, for that matter)...as these are some of the most typical and important types of moves you might find yourself having to use, and to a certain extent having to defend against - because I'm including the assumption that you're not necessarily just fighting some chump - but that in fact you could be fighting someone heavily trained. Moves that you must, imo, get very skilled at, because you work them, drill them, fight/spar with them...again-and-again.

1- Boxing straight lead punch
2- Boxing rear cross
3- double round punches (yes, this includes the proverbial "haymaker")
4- tight hooks
5- uppercuts
6- lead/cross/hook/uppercut combos
7- rear leg front kick (coming from a front stance)
8- rear leg roundhouse kick (coming from a front stance)
9- rear hand elbow strikes
10- rear leg knee strikes
11- from neutral stance: step-straight-ahead wing chun vertical fist chain punches (3 of them)
12- DOUBLE LEG SHOOT TAKEDOWN
13- lead roundhouse kick from a front stance
14- FOOTWORK (a category all by itself)
15- standing double wristlock (like jiu jitsu's kimura)
16- double wristlock from cross chest (side control) ground position
17- THE GROVIT (catch wrestling's standing front figure 4 facelock/choke)
18- Front headlock sprawl takedown (must be supplemented by knowledge of under/over hooks)
19- The good ol' short range wing chun rear leg heel kick from front stance to opponent's lead knee 20- WRESTLER'S DEFENSIVE SPRAWL (so important it's a category all by itself)
21- Rear naked choke
22- Use of mount position to strike
23- jiu jitsu arm bar from mount position
24- Use of guard position to neutralize & escape, double wristlock, arm bar, or sweep - with emphasis on neutralize & escape
25- standing side headlock to hip throw takedown
26- foot sweep (while standing) after set up by striking
27- inside trip to takedown from full clinch (ie.- while using double underhooks)
28- lead hand elbow strikes
29- Offensive use of lop/da
30- Offensive use of pak da

(Now keep in mind, I didn't directly mention use of things like tan, bong, garn, bil, jut, etc. because I'm really talking about approximately 60 moves, ie.- defense against some of THE TOP 30 would include using moves like garn, bong, etc.)

[monji112000]

8- rear leg roundhosue kick (coming from a front stance)
9- rear hand elbow strikes
13- lead roundhouse kick from a front stance
15- standing double wristlock (like jiu jitsu's kimura)
16- double wristlock from cross chest (side control) ground position
17- THE GROVIT (catch wrestling's standing front figure 4 facelock/choke)
18- Front headlock sprawl takedown (must be supplemented by knowledge of under/over hooks)
23- jiu jitsu arm bar from mount position


JMO but I would take these out of essential knowledge.

I serusly question most standing wristlocks, in fact most standing submissions. I know they work, I have seen Aoki's fight.. but for the most part they are a waste of time. JMO
Arm bar from the mount is not a street move JMO again. Its my go to move from the mount.. but the idea of someone taking a chunk out of my calf makes me cringe.. thats not the reason I say this though. If you are not SUPER good at them, you can give up position easily. I would replace it with a simple cross lapel choke or escaping to knee on belly. JMO

Have you ever seen a real fight that has people doing round kicks? or elbows??
to me the essentials should be the basics elements you need to survive the average street fight.
I would think hard about adding mount and side control escapes. Standing up in guard instead of sweeping. Sweeping is great but again you need to have more skill. learning to standup is much faster and can be quickly adapted by beginner guys. HALFGUARD?? Just understanding what to do to get him to not punch you in the face... and retake guard or standup..

JMO take it for whats its worth.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Standing grappling is used to control someone, ie: beat the living **** out of them and then clamp on a standing sub to control them ( and keep them from falling into the pool of their own blood).

[Ultimatewingchun]

Check out this vid - the standing double wristlock appears about 42 seconds in...

(scroll down a bit and you'll see the vid on the right side of the screen)

http://www.paladin-press.com/product/1144/17

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

An armbar in a streetfight with the bottom of your shoe on the side of his face (and with a nasty presence) will offer plenty of control and basically no chance of getting bitten.

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

And I agree that escaping back to your feet from guard is top priority, which is why I said that when using guard the emphasis is on neutralize and escape.

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

And yes, I have seen a rear roundhouse kick to the back of the thigh in a real streetfight.

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

Elbows? Why not? If you can double him over with a knee to the balls, what's to stop you from following up with an elbow to his head/face/temple?

[monji112000]

Check out this vid - the standing double wristlock appears about 42 seconds in...

(scroll down a bit and you'll the vid on the right side of the screen)

http://www.paladin-press.com/product/1144/17

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

An armbar in a streetfight with the bottom of your shoe on the side of his face (and with a nasty presence) will offer plenty of control and basically no chance of getting bitten.

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

And I agree that escaping back to your feet from guard is top priority, which is why I said that when using guard the emphasis is on neutralize and escape.

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

And yes, I have seen a rear roundhouse kick to the back of the thigh in a real streetfight.

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

Elbows? Why not? If you can double him over with a knee to the balls, what's to stop you from following up with an elbow to his head/face/temple?

1) I use the Kimura grip all the time in standup, its great for throwing people. The major issue with it is, you are giving the opponent your back, granted for only a second. I wouldn't suggest this technique to someone (in a street fight) unless they are well versed in grappling already. JMO

2) I know getting bit by a opponent isn't a real reason to pull it off the list.. that's why I said the reason was it again gives your opponent a chance to turn the tables on you. That's why everyone waits for armbar attempts in grappling, because allot of people can get out of them . If you are a well qualified grappler sure that's fine.. but why not first learn a high percentage technique that gives them no chance of reversing the position?
Any variation of the cross lapel choke from mount is DEADLY. it allows you to keep control of the opponent from mount and transition to other attacks. If you don't like using clothes to attack the person a no gi Ezekiel choke works well. You can use the CSW style neck crush or the blood choke version. Same benefits as the cross lapel choke. Also just escaping to knee on belly and then backing up.

3) OK you have.. I have never and you are the first person I have talked to that has. The question is would you rather train for higher probability scenarios as a "basics" curriculum or just things you see in MMA? Why not train for people kicking you in the balls too?

4) outside of a situp sweep what sweep from the guard are you going to do?? Honestly? I wouldn't suggest anyone opens there guard at all unless they are doing one of those sweeps. Forget armbars, triangles and omoplatas. Unless your putting allot of time at a gym day in and day out your not going to pull these things off. What will happen is they will be on top of you and you will be in a worse position.

JMO again I'm not trying to start a fight or argue.. just seems like a interesting topic.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . .
Have you ever seen a real fight that has people doing round kicks? or elbows?? . . . .
Heck yeah. I've seen many guys in NYC who learned JHR or 52 Blocks do leg round kicks and elbows.

[anerlich]

One of my sidais used elbows effectively against two attackers, one of whom had a baton. Big lump on his head from the stick, but the other two were KO'ed.

With the guard you should either get real close and shut him down (overhook with an angle and head control) or push him right away to kicking distance to regain your feet. Anywhere in between is very dangerous. As boring as the fight was, Inoki vs Ali was excellent use of the guard against a striker.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I agree, Andrew. That's the best use of guard in a real setting. Kick off and get up and off your back as quickly as you can, or pull him in tight and try to work an escape from there. And if a sub is for the taking as you're trying to escape, fine, go for it. But the main thing is to get out of there.

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

And yeah, elbows are great weapons.

Pick this one up at the 1:15 mark and check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dl-H1lGjDI&feature=rec-HM-fresh+div
..............................................

And of course back in Thailand, we have something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgKRVcqHVR8

[Edmund]

4) outside of a situp sweep what sweep from the guard are you going to do?? Honestly? I wouldn't suggest anyone opens there guard at all unless they are doing one of those sweeps. Forget armbars, triangles and omoplatas. Unless your putting allot of time at a gym day in and day out your not going to pull these things off. What will happen is they will be on top of you and you will be in a worse position.


I think you underestimate how capable you would be as a practicing grappler vs someone who doesn't know anything.

[t_niehoff]

Okay, I'm going to talk about what crosstraining and wing chun means to me, personally. And let me apologize in advance for the fact that I don't have any vids yet to supplement the following remarks with a visual. But yet is the keyword in that sentence, for I intend to put a bunch of new vids up as time goes on.

I'm going to talk about what I like to refer to as THE TOP 30...and by that I mean the 30 most important moves to know as a fighter - and I'm not getting into any weapons and multiple opponents scenarios with this, as that would increase the number considerably. For the moment, I'm talking strictly about unarmed combat.

Furthermore, when I talk about THE TOP 30, I'm actually talking about 60, since I also preach to my students that they must know adequate defenses against each of these moves as well.


A different perspective:

In my view, a person should begin by asking themself a question: Do they only care about learning/developing their WCK or do they want to become a well-rounded fighter? Either way, the answer and the path (the path is the answer btw) isn't in any prescribed list of "important moves" but in the development of various fighting skills (not "moves" -- "moves" or techniques are just examples of the skills in action).

The best and ONLY way for an indivdual to see what they need or where they are lacking is through quality sparring -- to spend some time sparring with good competent fighters and to actually see for themselves what they really need. As teachers or coaches, we shouldn't tell them but let them see (experience it) for themselves. If they spar and keep getting taken down at will, they will see that they need to develop either a good ground game or a good anti-takedown (wrestling) game or both. The teacher's or coach's job is IMO to provide that experience. No one should take anyone's word for what they need -- they should only take their own experience as evidence of what they need. If they aren't willing to do the work to see, they aren't willing to do the work to develop.

When a person does this work, they will come to the conclusion that to be a well-rounded fighter they need to be competent with stand-up, with clinch, and with ground. However, no one can tell another person what they specifically need for THEIR individual game. They must fashion that for themselves, through the process of self-discovery that comes from doing it, by finding what things work best for them, what their strengths are, what their weaknesses are, etc. A teacher or coach can show certain skills, can provide hints or suggestions, can help the trainee by structuring experiences -- in other words, help the trainee walk the path of self-discovery -- but the trainee can only develop through the process, the work.

The most important thing is this process or path -- if you are on the path, you will find your answers, you'll find what you need, you'll draw your own conclusions based on your own experience, etc. That process or path is what is critical, not any list of techniques or "moves".



"But wing chun is a concept based art, not a technique based art"...we hear so often. And when you talk about 30 "moves" - you're really talking about 30 techniques, so you're violating a major - perhaps the major - element of wing chun.

Now while I believe that wing chun is very much a concept-based art, and clearly more so than many (if not most) other martial arts, nonetheless, I find the "wing chun is concept-based and not technique based" argument to be a false argument - as if it's not possible to have set techniques in your arsenal and at the same time be very fluid and spontaneous in your expression of all of your techniques, fighting strategies, and the concepts and principles behind all of this...


The whole technique-based vs. concept-based paradigm is nonsensical. Is basketball, tennis, wrestling, boxing, or any athletic activity technique- or concept-based? Of course not. That thinking is flawed. WCK, like boxing or wrestling, is skill-based. You learn and develop various skills necessary to "play the game." Concepts, techniques, etc. are part and parcel of learning and developing skills.



And I've made it clear by now that, imo, wing chun is not only primarily a close quarter standup striking art, but that precisely because of this, wing chun can also use some longer range "help" - both as weaponry to do damage with and as a delivery system to the preferred very close quarter wing chun fighting range (distance)...


If you spend some time fighting at close-range (on the inside), you will find that you can't "only" strike -- that you will need to also control your opponent at the same time, otherwise he will move to control (clinch) you. WCK's method is to control while striking, to use sustained attachment to control the opponent as we put in our strikes (which also aid in control).

Whether a person needs to supplement their WCK depends on them -- personal preference, how good their entry skills are, etc.

WCK provides a framework, and individuals can add to that framework depending on their personal needs and preferences.

[monji112000]

Heck yeah. I've seen many guys in NYC who learned JHR or 52 Blocks do leg round kicks and elbows.

Yah I agree that you will see it, but its not common. Among skilled fighters people kick... the average person doesn't unless you are talking about kicking people in the balls. I would say that "street fighting" training should focus heavily on what you are MOST likely to deal with. I'm not saying don't train against round kicks.. but I am saying don't include it in "street fighting".. its just not used in 90% of fights.


One of my sidais used elbows effectively against two attackers, one of whom had a baton. Big lump on his head from the stick, but the other two were KO'ed.



With the guard you should either get real close and shut him down (overhook with an angle and head control) or push him right away to kicking distance to regain your feet. Anywhere in between is very dangerous. As boring as the fight was, Inoki vs Ali was excellent use of the guard against a striker.

elbows are the same as round kicks see above statement.

the overhook and neck control is a great position but were are you going to go with it? that position gives you triangles, omoplatas and an armbar. You have a Very nice modified cross lapel choke. I have been working heavily with the double underhook position. It affords you the greatest ability to control the opponents posture. Your major options are taking the back, armbar and arm triangle.

9 times out of ten I work for the back first or I work to sweep with the armbar.



I think you underestimate how capable you would be as a practicing grappler vs someone who doesn't know anything.

that's true a experienced grappler has a major advantage over someone who doesn't know anything. I would rather every time have that advantage.. but what guarantee do you have that you are the one in a advantage? If again we are talking "street fight", many variables exist that you can't control. what type of opponent is he? skilled? size? speed? ect.. who else is involved? what is your condition? have you had a drink? ect...

What you choose to do for someone smaller than you and who is less skilled is something completely different than what you would do for the reverse.
That's why I say put high probability, "safe" techniques above anything else. Emphasis position, not going for risky techniques that could cause you to go to the hospital or worse.
JMO again

[chusauli]

I think that top 30 is based on Victor's defining an arsenal for freefighting. I don't think its right or wrong, they're just tools. I do believe most of the tools here are high percentage effective tools, but how one trains will vary what you get out of them.

Hypothetically, one could make an art based on knockouts and submissions, but its only showing the end product, not what is going into the training behind it.

[t_niehoff]

I think that top 30 is based on Victor's defining an arsenal for freefighting. I don't think its right or wrong, they're just tools. I do believe most of the tools here are high percentage effective tools, but how one trains will vary what you get out of them.

Hypothetically, one could make an art based on knockouts and submissions, but its only showing the end product, not what is going into the training behind it.

It doesn't make any sense to begin with an "arsenal" -- you need to begin with a game, how you want to approach fighting. That and playing that game will tell you what you need. If, for example, you want to ground-and-pound, you'll need certain specific skills to do that, different skills than if you wanted to play (fight with) a different game. And even within that particular game (GNP), your game will vary depending on your strengths, weaknesses, etc. There are various ways to play GNP.

If you don't want either a GNP or sub game, do you really need a double leg shoot? No. If you want sprawl-and-brawl, for example, a double leg isn't a necessary skill. Nor will you be prepared for a situation where you do pull it off -- because then you need a whole host of other skills because you are now on the ground. For example, you'll need escapes (what happens if you take him down and he sweeps and pins you?). You'll need sub defenses and a whole host of ground skills. Things Victor leaves off his list.

Nor does learning how to defend a double leg teach you how to defend a single leg or and inside trip.

But for the sake of argument, let's say that someone wants to make takedowns a part of their game. They can't just add only the double leg (shoot) to their arsenal and expect to be able to take anyone down. You're not going to be able to pull off a double leg in many situations (like if your opponent has an unmatched stance). You need different takedowns based on what an opponent is giving you. Not only that, but you need to have a game that takes into account various defenses (how to defeat a downblock or sprawl). It's not the case of simply adding a tool to your arsenal. You have to develop a game or subgame.

[chusauli]

Terence, I suppose if someone is putting tools in an arsenal, the idea is to have a game.

I agree that combat training should be more situational. What is your bottom ground game - your on top ground game, your standing entry game, your take down game, your infighting game, your weapons against empty hand game, etc. Then tools will come out in situationally as needed.

[sanjuro_ronin]

On the flip side, certain people do better with certain tools and a such, they should develop the game around those tools.
Its not a case of either/or really, most of the time these things are developed at the same time.
I was taught a Jab in boxing long before any coach give me the suggestion to be this or that type of fighter.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Terence, Robert, Paul: great discussion. I liked 90% of Terence's posts here, and I think Robert clarified the parts I disagreed with. And Paul (sanjuro), you're right, crosstraining is extremely important, but whatever part of the game seems to be your strength - you emphasize that.

[Ultimatewingchun]

from: Giorgos
Edited: 07/22/09 6:55 PM


True ! The blocking and trapping work real well.. the striking has to be modified to do any damage though

" Wing Chun works very well when one is in guard or holding guard. The enforced range makes trapping very effective. "
..................................................


"In modern MMA yes. Bareknuckle, WC strikes from the guard are very nasty. Much better than the slop hammerfists and some of the awkward elbows you see in every UFC. Unless you have fought and sparred in gloves and without them, you can not imagine the difference.

The primary reason most WC guys cannot fight is that they train almost all the time in how to defend against WC punches, and in the real world no one is going to hit you like that. I've been fighting and bouncing for 15 years and no one has ever fired a vertical fist up my centerline, or trap and backfisted me.

There is an energy there that is worth learning, but you have to discard 90% of the method as anachronistic, and inapplicable to real fighting.

I'm speaking here of traditional Yip Man type WC, as it was all I was exposed to back in the day. There may be a ton of guys in WC crosstraining now, I don't know."
.........................................

"True that about WC only training to defend WC strikes; mostly true. I had been doing Muy Thai for nearly 7 years. However, now I am in Cyprus (for the past 4 years or so) and there aren't any good gyms around here. In fact, the only place I can get some good work is a WC dojo and the main reason because is that, that specific place attracts the better athletes that wanna do fight sports. out of 50 people that are there I can easily beat 40-45 and the reason is mostly because they find it hard to adjust their WC training to MT strikes. They find it especially hard to defend against the right straight; it has to do with how they are used to using pak-sao (a parry similar to the one Machida knocked Evans with).

However, there are at least 5 guys who are getting a lot of sparring between themselves, they have all cross-trained or do so at present, they work extensively on their ground game and they are indeed really good. Them guys, there is no way I can beat them unless I get really lucky...I have sparred with pro MMA fighters before so I know how fighting a good fighter feels like...."

[Ultimatewingchun]

From: WidespreadPanic
Member Since: 12/29/06
Posts: 2503


"In modern MMA yes. Bareknuckle, WC strikes from the guard are very nasty. Much better than the slop hammerfists and some of the awkward elbows you see in every UFC. Unless you have fought and sparred in gloves and without them, you can not imagine the difference."
.................................................. ...

"I'm surprised you said this. One might 'think' that WC chain punches from the guard (striking down on a mounted opponent) are effective but they're not, unless the opponent is a complete noob and has just closed their eyes and cringed.

Consider what's going on. You're doing a straight line technique, where just a bit of deflection will make it miss the target. Take a hammer and hold it like a wing chun punch and try to push it and hit a nail on the head. It's awkward and difficult. Now try it using a 'hammering motion'. You can easily hit the nail. Why? Because in the 'hammering motion', you are keying off your elbow and doing a more natural motion.

Likewise the reason they throw 'slop' hammerfists is because the guy on the bottom is tying up the center, twisting, moving and ducking. But if you get your elbow in there, you can throw a hammerfist and hit with it several times. It's also got a favorable 'angle of entry', going sort of 'around the corner' making it harder to block.

The opponent is trying to block your hand on a hammer fist because he can't get to your elbow and you can pin with your elbow and still throw them. The movement arc is sweeping a wider area, and you don't have to have much precision at all. With a WC centerline punch you still have to have precision, both in depth/distancing (you have to impact at the right part of the motion) and in hitting a moving target. With a hammerfist if you impact during almost any part of the arc past 90 degrees, it's causing damage."

[Edmund]

What you choose to do for someone smaller than you and who is less skilled is something completely different than what you would do for the reverse.
That's why I say put high probability, "safe" techniques above anything else. Emphasis position, not going for risky techniques that could cause you to go to the hospital or worse.


You said you wouldn't open your guard to sweep other than a situp sweep.
The alternative is not sweeping which frankly is not a safer option. You can't just look for a situp sweep.

Actually your higher probability for any size or skill person is to actively try do something from the guard.

Someone without any sweeps aside from a situp sweep would be seriously limited.

[monji112000]

You said you wouldn't open your guard to sweep other than a situp sweep.
The alternative is not sweeping which frankly is not a safer option. You can't just look for a situp sweep.

Actually your higher probability for any size or skill person is to actively try do something from the guard.

Someone without any sweeps aside from a situp sweep would be seriously limited.

I made my statements based on the idea of a average person learning basic combat techniques for a "street fight"/ self-defence. this is the first basic concept you learn when playing the guard, don't open your guard. Every time you open your guard you lose control of the opponents body. Even in MMA its clear that anyone can control and "stall" from the guard.. that's why people lose so much for being in the guard. You can neutralize and still lose a mma fight.. heck you can attempt submissions from the guard and neutralize.. but if it doesn't look like your being "aggressive" you probably down on points. If you roll with anyone beyond the first month you will find that unless you have a great deal of skill advantage sweeps from the guard can often give up position. Armbars, triangles and omoplata can often give up position. If we are talking about a purple belt vrs a person who has never done any type of wrestling sure this isn't really a issue.. but then you have many other factors in a "self defence" situation that you must consider. I believe very strongly always assume the worst and always be "safe". You can do allot of things from a closed guard, and I believe strongly those things can be taught very quickly and drilled with LIVE resistance.

If we are talking about self defence again, I wouldn't focus on allot of sweeps...
unless we are talking about Jacare fightings some guy at a bar..
The skill level it takes to pull off allot of "fancy" stuff isn't practical for high adrenaline situations for a large amount of people. JMO I love the fancy stuff too. everything has its place... I wouldn't start playing quarter guard in a street fight.. but having that experience would help me survive.

[t_niehoff]

I made my statements based on the idea of a average person learning basic combat techniques for a "street fight"/ self-defence.


In my view, your "idea" is ill-conceived.

What any person needs to develop competent fighting skills are the fundamentals and then lots of quality practice. There isn't one way for the "average person wanting to learn self-defense" and another for other people.



this is the first basic concept you learn when playing the guard, don't open your guard. Every time you open your guard you lose control of the opponents body. Even in MMA its clear that anyone can control and "stall" from the guard.. that's why people lose so much for being in the guard. You can neutralize and still lose a mma fight.. heck you can attempt submissions from the guard and neutralize.. but if it doesn't look like your being "aggressive" you probably down on points. If you roll with anyone beyond the first month you will find that unless you have a great deal of skill advantage sweeps from the guard can often give up position. Armbars, triangles and omoplata can often give up position. If we are talking about a purple belt vrs a person who has never done any type of wrestling sure this isn't really a issue.. but then you have many other factors in a "self defence" situation that you must consider. I believe very strongly always assume the worst and always be "safe". You can do allot of things from a closed guard, and I believe strongly those things can be taught very quickly and drilled with LIVE resistance.


It doesn't sound to me like you have much experience with BJJ or ground fighting. From my perspective, good guard play (which I've seen from when it has been done to me), whether open or closed, is not about controlling your opponent's body but about destroying his posture and base -- which then set up "scoring" opportunities. This can be accomplished in either open or closed guard (one is not better than the other -- what matters is what YOU personally are best at. And, you often don't get the choice of whjat guard to play). Sweeps, even if you don't fully pull them off, can disrupt posture and base, and are often used as set-ups (you go for a sweep and use his resistance to the sweep to move into a sub or other attack).

I can tell you from experience (my own and what I've seen with others) that when playing guard against decent wrestlers (who have a very well-developed base), I've found that butterfly (hook) guard is much more effective at disrupting their base than closed guard.



If we are talking about self defence again, I wouldn't focus on allot of sweeps...
unless we are talking about Jacare fightings some guy at a bar..
The skill level it takes to pull off allot of "fancy" stuff isn't practical for high adrenaline situations for a large amount of people. JMO I love the fancy stuff too. everything has its place... I wouldn't start playing quarter guard in a street fight.. but having that experience would help me survive.

I disagree. It's much easier to pull off sweeps (which aren't "fancy moves" but fundamental skills of BJJ) against low-level and untrained guys since they don't have a developed base and are often unbalanced to begin with. You also need to take what your opponent gives you, and if he gives you a sweep you should take it.

[monji112000]

In my view, your "idea" is ill-conceived.

What any person needs to develop competent fighting skills are the fundamentals and then lots of quality practice. There isn't one way for the "average person wanting to learn self-defense" and another for other people.

everyone has their own ideas on what makes sense. I believe if your training for self defence train what will be 99% of times thrown at you. You don't that fine, I understand.



It doesn't sound to me like you have much experience with BJJ or ground fighting..
I have been doing BJJ for 2 years, so no I don't have as much experience as all my older training brothers. I have competed many times, and I constantly test my ideas live situations. I often change my mind based on my results.



From my perspective, good guard play (which I've seen from when it has been done to me), whether open or closed, is not about controlling your opponent's body but about destroying his posture and base -- which then set up "scoring" opportunities. This can be accomplished in either open or closed guard (one is not better than the other -- what matters is what YOU personally are best at. And, you often don't get the choice of whjat guard to play). Sweeps, even if you don't fully pull them off, can disrupt posture and base, and are often used as set-ups (you go for a sweep and use his resistance to the sweep to move into a sub or other attack).

Just so we are on the same page what is your experience? I can honestly say you are 100% wrong about opening and closing your guard. its true in GI BJJ open guard is very common, but it takes a high level of skill to play this game successfully on a high percentage basis. (I play allot of open guard personally its fun). In no GI yes some people play open guard ie X guard type stuff and rubber guard. It is common knowledge that open guard in no gi is 100 times harder to get good at because of high chance of people passing. These are all common knowledge concepts that all BJJ player know. I'm not saying this is better than that, I'm saying when it counts( your life and health take the safe option.) I know about combinations and setting up your opponent.. but again the skill that is required to do these things in a high adrenaline situation on a high percentage on completion is higher than you think. What sweep are you thinking about? maybe I'm wrong explain your reasoning in detail to me.




I can tell you from experience (my own and what I've seen with others) that when playing guard against decent wrestlers (who have a very well-developed base), I've found that butterfly (hook) guard is much more effective at disrupting their base than closed guard.
sure I play butterfly guard all the time, thats how I set-up to x guard. You are ignoring the fact that 1) butterfly guard controls 0% of the opponents body 2)takes a good deal of skill to master not letting someone pass 3) I don't think you have tried letting people punch you from this position..





I disagree. It's much easier to pull off sweeps (which aren't "fancy moves" but fundamental skills of BJJ) against low-level and untrained guys since they don't have a developed base and are often unbalanced to begin with. You also need to take what your opponent gives you, and if he gives you a sweep you should take it.
of course if he gives you something take it, but what if he doesn't? what if he overpowers you? what size people do you work with? I'm the smallest guy at my gym (well one person is smaller). I roll with people who range from 20-100 pounds heaver than me and normally more skilled than me. A smart fighter is a safe fighter, wild fighting styles work sometimes.. but smart tactical fighting works more often.

may I ask how often do you roll? How often do you compete? I'm only saying that the more you put yourself out there the more you see what easy to do and whats not.

[t_niehoff]

everyone has their own ideas on what makes sense. I believe if your training for self defence train what will be 99% of times thrown at you. You don't that fine, I understand.


I think training for "self-defense" or "streetfighting" is in itself a dead end. It is misconceived.



Just so we are on the same page what is your experience? I can honestly say you are 100% wrong about opening and closing your guard. its true in GI BJJ open guard is very common, but it takes a high level of skill to play this game successfully on a high percentage basis. (I play allot of open guard personally its fun). In no GI yes some people play open guard ie X guard type stuff and rubber guard. It is common knowledge that open guard in no gi is 100 times harder to get good at because of high chance of people passing. These are all common knowledge concepts that all BJJ player know. I'm not saying this is better than that, I'm saying when it counts( your life and health take the safe option.) I know about combinations and setting up your opponent.. but again the skill that is required to do these things in a high adrenaline situation on a high percentage on completion is higher than you think. What sweep are you thinking about? maybe I'm wrong explain your reasoning in detail to me.


I've only been practicing BJJ for four or five years now. You keep talking about "common knowledge" -- I don't know where you get this stuff nor many of your other opinions.



sure I play butterfly guard all the time, thats how I set-up to x guard. You are ignoring the fact that 1) butterfly guard controls 0% of the opponents body 2)takes a good deal of skill to master not letting someone pass 3) I don't think you have tried letting people punch you from this position..


As I said, for me it's not about controlling the opponent's body but his posture and base. Have you heard of these things? As far as not letting someone pass -- sure it takes skill. So does everything, including subs. And you can play butterfly guard with double underhooks (or over-under) and get real close if you are concerned about being punched.

And, btw, your arguments are inconsistent. On the one hand you talk about training for self-defense and the things you are likely to face, and then on the other hand now talk about concern for having your guard passed. Well, "on the street" against untrained people, it is very unlikely that anyone will pass your guard if you have even basic level skills. Only someone who knows what they are doing will be looking to or have the skill to pass your guard.



of course if he gives you something take it, but what if he doesn't? what if he overpowers you? what size people do you work with? I'm the smallest guy at my gym (well one person is smaller). I roll with people who range from 20-100 pounds heaver than me and normally more skilled than me. A smart fighter is a safe fighter, wild fighting styles work sometimes.. but smart tactical fighting works more often.


I train with people of all sizes and all skill levels. Quite frankly, what you are saying makes little sense. You just seem to be repeating cliched catch-phrases. People who are more skilled than you will beat you. That's true in any sport or game. Your best chance of beating anyone is to be more skilled than they are. Tactics are a part of the skill. So if someone is concerned with having a ground game -- whether for self-defense or whatever -- they should be concerned with developing greater overall grappling skill. And as they develop that skill, they will naturally find what works best for them.

[Knifefighter]

I made my statements based on the idea of a average person learning basic combat techniques for a "street fight"/ self-defence. this is the first basic concept you learn when playing the guard, don't open your guard.
From a street fight/ self-defence perspective, opening your guard is probably one of the best things you can do.

Methinks you train too much sport BJJ.

[t_niehoff]

From a street fight/ self-defence perspective, opening your guard is probably one of the best things you can do.

And why should anyone listen to a BJJ black belt with NHB/MMA fighting experience? ;)

[monji112000]

From a street fight/ self-defence perspective, opening your guard is probably one of the best things you can do.

Methinks you train too much sport BJJ.

I hear what you are saying and you are correct.. thats all I do. I do train once and a while with striking on the ground though. I still firmly believe without a ref stopping you for stalling its easier to get real good at a "closed guard game" (ie closed guard submissions and escapes to the back and standing up/situp sweep) than some type of open guard game. Lets look at it from a different perspective what about Military combat training?

I will say that in some cases a basic open guard is great to prevent some strikes.. so nothing is absolute.

here are some stuff that show what I mean by closed guard attacks and escapes:
one of my fav set-ups
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6QByCIIUqw&feature=related
this position allows you to take the back and armbar.
this set-up can be done with a high body lock/double underhook also. You can't get the arm triangle though..

[Knifefighter]

I hear what you are saying and you are correct.. thats all I do. I do train once and a while with striking on the ground though. I still firmly believe without a ref stopping you for stalling its easier to get real good at a "closed guard game" (ie closed guard submissions and escapes to the back and standing up/situp sweep) than some type of open guard game. Lets look at it from a different perspective what about Military combat training?

I will say that in some cases a basic open guard is great to prevent some strikes.. so nothing is absolute.

here are some stuff that show what I mean by closed guard attacks and escapes:
one of my fav set-ups
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6QByCIIUqw&feature=related
this position allows you to take the back and armbar.
this set-up can be done with a high body lock/double underhook also. You can't get the arm triangle though..

What is the first thing that a lot of people will do when you pull them into a closed guard? They will bite the cr@p out of you, of course.

And if a guy is significantly bigger than you, he's going to stand up and slam you back into the ground.

[monji112000]

I think training for "self-defense" or "streetfighting" is in itself a dead end. It is misconceived.



I've only been practicing BJJ for four or five years now. You keep talking about "common knowledge" -- I don't know where you get this stuff nor many of your other opinions.



As I said, for me it's not about controlling the opponent's body but his posture and base. Have you heard of these things? As far as not letting someone pass -- sure it takes skill. So does everything, including subs. And you can play butterfly guard with double underhooks (or over-under) and get real close if you are concerned about being punched.

And, btw, your arguments are inconsistent. On the one hand you talk about training for self-defense and the things you are likely to face, and then on the other hand now talk about concern for having your guard passed. Well, "on the street" against untrained people, it is very unlikely that anyone will pass your guard if you have even basic level skills. Only someone who knows what they are doing will be looking to or have the skill to pass your guard.



I train with people of all sizes and all skill levels. Quite frankly, what you are saying makes little sense. You just seem to be repeating cliched catch-phrases. People who are more skilled than you will beat you. That's true in any sport or game. Your best chance of beating anyone is to be more skilled than they are. Tactics are a part of the skill. So if someone is concerned with having a ground game -- whether for self-defense or whatever -- they should be concerned with developing greater overall grappling skill. And as they develop that skill, they will naturally find what works best for them.

well we all have different ideas and teachers. I get my ideas from experience and conversations with my teachers and more experienced fellow students. I respect your opinion, I simply don't agree with it. If you look at things from a simpler premise you may see were I'm coming from. I don't believe training differently for selfdefense is a misconceived notion. core skills are the same but allot of things are different. again, I see were you are coming from I simply don't agree with you.

[Edmund]

I made my statements based on the idea of a average person learning basic combat techniques for a "street fight"/ self-defence. this is the first basic concept you learn when playing the guard, don't open your guard. Every time you open your guard you lose control of the opponents body.


I think I learnt some different basic concepts. (I've done 3 years of judo.) I would have said it's the other way around: i.e. you should open your guard. Most times you want to move them rather than hold them in position. Unless you have a choke locked on, you want to use your legs to control them not just clamp around them.



If we are talking about self defence again, I wouldn't focus on allot of sweeps...
unless we are talking about Jacare fightings some guy at a bar..
The skill level it takes to pull off allot of "fancy" stuff isn't practical for high adrenaline situations for a large amount of people. JMO I love the fancy stuff too. everything has its place... I wouldn't start playing quarter guard in a street fight.. but having that experience would help me survive.

I'm not talking fancy moves. I'm talking top 30 skills/techs. If you only work from a closed guard, I think it's limiting the opportunities you will be able to do sweeps or anything else. You best opportunities come when they are off balance.

Similarly you wanted to take out a front headlock sprawl. I don't know why you think it's not essential. Sprawling is important vs takedowns and one of the best ways to get their weight onto their hands and prevent them from getting under your hips is to control the head.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . .
here are some stuff that show what I mean by closed guard attacks and escapes:
one of my fav set-ups
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6QByCIIUqw&feature=related
this position allows you to take the back and armbar.
this set-up can be done with a high body lock/double underhook also. You can't get the arm triangle though..
I liked the lop sao from the ground to stop the strike. :)

[Ultimatewingchun]

I mentioned the standing figure 4 facelock (known as the grovit) as part of my top 30. One of the best catch wrestlers of the 20th century was Billy Robinson (he's still alive) - who trained in catch at Billy Riley's "snake pit" in Wigan, England back in the 1950's - at the same time that Karl Gotch did, in fact. Both of them went on to be awesome pro wrestlers both in Europe and here in America.

Billy Robinson just returned to the United States after living in Japan for many years - where he taught some catch submissions to both Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett.

Here he is at a seminar in the U.S. about a year-and-a-half ago demonstrating THE GROVIT.

He's in the vid from the beginning up to the 4:25 point.

(And btw, the fourth still photo that appears at the very beginning of this vid is of Karl Gotch on the left and Billy on the right).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4

[monji112000]

I mentioned the standing figure 4 facelock (known as the grovit) as part of my top 30. One of the best catch wrestlers of the 20th century was Billy Robinson (he's still alive) - who trained in catch at Billy Riley's "snake pit" in Wigan, England back in the 1950's - at the same time that Karl Gotch did, in fact. Both of them went on to be awesome pro wrestlers both in Europe and here in America.

Billy Robinson just returned to the United States after living in Japan for many years - where he taught some catch submissions to both Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett.

Here he is at a seminar in the U.S. about a year-and-a-half ago demonstrating THE GROVIT.

He's in the vid from the beginning up to the 4:25 point.

(And btw, the fourth still photo that appears at the very beginning of this vid is of Karl Gotch on the left and Billy on the right).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4

I love catch wrestling, and I have a deep respect for those guys. I hate neck cranks personally, I find they are hit and miss. I have taped many times to them, and I have not.. sometimes I think i should have.. but thats the thing with them. I Guess you could transition to a knee quickly using the grovit.


I liked the lop sao from the ground to stop the strike. :) shh don't tell anyone that. :D No wing chun on the ground:rolleyes:


I think I learnt some different basic concepts. (I've done 3 years of judo.) I would have said it's the other way around: i.e. you should open your guard. Most times you want to move them rather than hold them in position. Unless you have a choke locked on, you want to use your legs to control them not just clamp around them.



I'm not talking fancy moves. I'm talking top 30 skills/techs. If you only work from a closed guard, I think it's limiting the opportunities you will be able to do sweeps or anything else. You best opportunities come when they are off balance.

Similarly you wanted to take out a front headlock sprawl. I don't know why you think it's not essential. Sprawling is important vs takedowns and one of the best ways to get their weight onto their hands and prevent them from getting under your hips is to control the head.
A Judo guy saying to not stall in the closed guard when it goes to the ground?
I'm not saying that opening the guard is the worst idea or even a bad idea.. I just feel from experience , seeing friends fight that once you open your guard you lose control. If you have the skill to compensate GREAT, but if you don't your in a worse position. If you have the skill to pull off a complicated guard in a street fight, with adrenaline going ect.. wonderful but I don't believe that the average person does. I'm sure the average purple belt and above does. Again I'm not thinking about tournament BJJ, I'm looking at it from a perspective of I just escaped some position and got him into my guard. he is punching me.. ok what do I do? I would control, and safely work to better my position. The guard sucks, but its a common position people escape bad situations with. Just look at old matches of top game grapplers.. they have ****ty guards.. Josh Barnet, Mark Kerr , Randy Couture ( hear his guard is much better now). I now I have seen atleast those guys pull guard in ADCC or old MMA matches.

I'm not the only person who feels this way about the closed guard. Maybe on this forum.. but thats cool. How does this relate to the topic of crosstraining and wing chun??

[Ultimatewingchun]

How does it relate? Well, we just love to argue about everything around here! :cool: :D

[Edmund]

A Judo guy saying to not stall in the closed guard when it goes to the ground?


I think you'd have to watch some judo comps. There's seldom the opportunity to close your guard in the first place. You can certainly stall if you get it closed.

BUT If you actually want to do anything attacking from the guard, you are given very little time to show progress i.e. improving position or getting a submission.

Which is why you have to attack straight away. With only a closed guard you are very limited in the types of attacks you can do.


I'm not saying that opening the guard is the worst idea or even a bad idea.. I just feel from experience , seeing friends fight that once you open your guard you lose control. If you have the skill to compensate GREAT, but if you don't your in a worse position. If you have the skill to pull off a complicated guard in a street fight, with adrenaline going ect.. wonderful but I don't believe that the average person does.


I think opposite. The average person has to learn to fight from the open guard.
You can be far more proactive from an open guard.




I'm not the only person who feels this way about the closed guard. Maybe on this forum.. but thats cool. How does this relate to the topic of crosstraining and wing chun??

You were advocating only situp sweep and closed guard as a method of crosstraining. I don't think any beginner can survive with just a closed guard.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Just in case all the "crosstraining and wing chun" you've been doing doesn't work out, including THE TOP 30...and you're in the neighborhood bar...and there's a problem...

then I want to introduce what I now want to call ------ #31:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqJSFXQCN88&feature=related

[Phil Redmond]

I decided to add these clips as well. You guys can thank me later. :D

1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQVaTEPOsTA&feature=related

2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVqCgBEei0o&feature=related

3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCox0f69a04&feature=related

4.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mvp59EDEOc&feature=related

5.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81N4C4Bzc6Y&feature=related

6.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE8JzdolJy4&feature=related

7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrO33qgzZxE&feature=related

8.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8UZmA4PCKM&feature=related

9.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvVnsaPB9PU&feature=related

10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkDkUPZa4iE&feature=related

11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtV_6llTaPE&feature=related

[t_niehoff]

I mentioned the standing figure 4 facelock (known as the grovit) as part of my top 30. One of the best catch wrestlers of the 20th century was Billy Robinson (he's still alive) - who trained in catch at Billy Riley's "snake pit" in Wigan, England back in the 1950's - at the same time that Karl Gotch did, in fact. Both of them went on to be awesome pro wrestlers both in Europe and here in America.

Billy Robinson just returned to the United States after living in Japan for many years - where he taught some catch submissions to both Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett.

Here he is at a seminar in the U.S. about a year-and-a-half ago demonstrating THE GROVIT.

He's in the vid from the beginning up to the 4:25 point.

(And btw, the fourth still photo that appears at the very beginning of this vid is of Karl Gotch on the left and Billy on the right).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4

That just appears to be the front headlock, transitioning into a neckcrank. Quite frankly, I think that set up and the sub itself looks fairly low-percentage (as opposed to a guillotine which is very high percentage). I say that since for the crank to work your opponent's head has to be buried in your torso and even if you manage to trap his head there (which isn't easy), all he will need to do is wiggle it to the outside or change the angle (body relationshsip) to get out of the crank.

Do you know of any video footage of that crank being pulled off successfully in a sub grappling or MMA competition?

Dale, what is your take on this?

[Knifefighter]

That just appears to be the front headlock, transitioning into a neckcrank. Quite frankly, I think that set up and the sub itself looks fairly low-percentage (as opposed to a guillotine which is very high percentage). I say that since for the crank to work your opponent's head has to be buried in your torso and even if you manage to trap his head there (which isn't easy), all he will need to do is wiggle it to the outside or change the angle (body relationshsip) to get out of the crank.

Do you know of any video footage of that crank being pulled off successfully in a sub grappling or MMA competition?

Dale, what is your take on this?

The move, as shown, won't really work against most people with even a little grappling experience. There is too much space. What needs to happen is to change it to a full figure four with the hand in the bicep and the other hand on the opponent's back (like the Anoconda, but without the arm in). Even, then, the guillotine is much higher percentage and easier to sink.

[Ultimatewingchun]

On the contrary, I think the figure four front facelock (grovit) is easier-to-get than the guillotine because with the guillotine you have to snake your arm around his throat/carotid area, which is a much smaller space to work with than the easier-to-get crossface that initiates the grovit - precisely because with the crossface you're working with a much larger area...

ie.- he can much more easily hide his throat can he can hide the entire side of his face...

plus the leverage needed for the guillotine tap requires more movement and angle than the grovit...(ie.- oftentimes it will require going to the ground by jumping into guard).

And like Billy Robinson says, if you don't get the tap within about 5 seconds, you're probably not going to get it - but you are in a good position to transition to something else.

And btw, here's another way to set it up, notwithstanding the fact that in this vid it's called the "grobbit" (whatever)...from the more conventional wrestlers' front headlock (ie.- with the arm capture overhook)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIZxTQl14rQ&feature=related

[t_niehoff]

I'm in a quandary: Who should I believe, the BJJ BB with loads of quality grappling experience (including competition) or a novice grappler who "thinks"?

It seems to me that if it is easier to get than guillotines, then it should be easy to find examples of it working in sub grappling or MMA competitions, right?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Well, if there was even one objective bone in your body, you might want to consider the views of a Billy Robinson, who taught submissions to Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett - two people who hold Billy in major esteem.

But hey, that's just me.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Here's another vid from Billy....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNyK0lwq_cc&feature=fvw

[taojkd]

I decided to add these clips as well. You guys can thank me later.

Thanks Bas!!


There is too much space. What needs to happen is to change it to a full figure four with the hand in the bicep and the other hand on the opponent's back (like the Anoconda, but without the arm in).

Variation by KenFlo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_3N0gckHqk

[Phil Redmond]

Thanks Bas!!

Good one. :p

[Knifefighter]

Well, if there was even one objective bone in your body, you might want to consider the views of a Billy Robinson, who taught submissions to Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett - two people who hold Billy in major esteem.

But hey, that's just me.

Actually, objectively speaking, you'd probably want to go with the one that has been demonstrated thousands of times to actually work against skilled, resisting opponents vs. the one that there is no objective evidence of actually being used against skilled, resisting opponents.

[Knifefighter]

Well, if there was even one objective bone in your body, you might want to consider the views of a Billy Robinson, who taught submissions to Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett - two people who hold Billy in major esteem.



Here's another vid from Billy....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNyK0lwq_cc&feature=fvw

Or you might want to consider the fact that when Sakuraba (a guy who actually rolls) does that technique he knows how to do it the right way vs. the wrong way shown by Mills (who was a carney/fixed-match wrestler who hasn't done much real rolling).

[Ultimatewingchun]

Have no idea who Mills is :confused:...but that's besides the point.

What is the point - is that I won't be trolled into a "catch wrestling-sucks-but-BJJ-is-great" sidetrack. There are quite a few real, do-able, highly effective catch moves that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...

but if the likes of a Billy Robinson (and a Karl Gotch, and a Billy Riley) speak highly of the effectiveness of the grovit - then that has to carry weight. Perhaps Saku and Josh never learned the move from Billy, I don't know...so what?

Here's a a whole series of a cacc (catch as catch can) lock flow moves/submissions with setups that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...

but I can tell you this much: after watching this, you've got to be clueless if you think that none of this stuff could work against a skilled, resisting opponent.

And that will be it: after this, I, for one, will go back to talking strictly about crosstraining and wing chun.

So here it is, some catch wrestling, one more time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcvL68kgJ4A

[Knifefighter]

What is the point - is that I won't be trolled into a "catch wrestling-sucks-but-BJJ-is-great" sidetrack. There are quite a few real, do-able, highly effective catch moves that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...
What sucks is not necessarily catch wrestling, but the phoney techniques that are taught but never actually taken out and tested against resisting, skilled opponents. Most people who bill themselves as "Catch-wrestlers" are looking for the "secret, magical techniques" that will give them the advantage (hmm... kind of like a lot of WC guys).

Real grapplers know that the real secret is going out and testing against resisting, skilled opponents in a wide variety of settings. Most real grapplers who do real submission training and don't specialize in BJJ are embarrassed to call themselves as Catch-wrestlers" and prefer to refer to themselves as submission grapplers.

[t_niehoff]

What is the point - is that I won't be trolled into a "catch wrestling-sucks-but-BJJ-is-great" sidetrack. There are quite a few real, do-able, highly effective catch moves that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...


It's not a catch-vs-BJJ issue but rather a what-is-proven-good-grappling issue. To say whether or not something is "highly effective" you have to see it actually work "highly effectively" in competitive situations, not in novice grappling or in demos.



but if the likes of a Billy Robinson (and a Karl Gotch, and a Billy Riley) speak highly of the effectiveness of the grovit - then that has to carry weight. Perhaps Saku and Josh never learned the move from Billy, I don't know...so what?


Why is it that your "evidence" for catch is always name-dropping (lineage) instead of being able to point to the thing actually working in a competitive environment? If something works, then we should be able to see it working, not have to take some "names" word for it.



Here's a a whole series of a cacc (catch as catch can) lock flow moves/submissions with setups that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...

but I can tell you this much: after watching this, you've got to be clueless if you think that none of this stuff could work against a skilled, resisting opponent.

And that will be it: after this, I, for one, will go back to talking strictly about crosstraining and wing chun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcvL68kgJ4A

Here you go again, talking about how this stuff should work -- and anyone who doesn't agree with your theoretical perspective is "clueless" -- instead of being able to actually show it working. What that means is that you have no evidence that it has worked or does work against competent grapplers.

[Knifefighter]

Here's a a whole series of a cacc (catch as catch can) lock flow moves/submissions with setups that haven't yet appeared on the professional mma scene...

but I can tell you this much: after watching this, you've got to be clueless if you think that none of this stuff could work against a skilled, resisting opponent.

The fact is (and you would know this if you had actually set foot into the real sub-grappling/mma scene instead of staying cloistered in your studio), new high-percentage techniques that work take the sub-grappling world like wildfire. The D'arce choke, a perfect example, was mostly unknown several years ago and was all over the place as soon as people started getting tapped by it. Any decent, new technique will spread like a virus. Those techniques shown on that vid are not those types of techniques.

Most sub-grapplers have been exposed to all of the techniques shown on that clip by the time they have reached intermediate stage. The reason you don't see them being used is because 99% of them don't work 99% of the time, as most of us have figured out by the time we have reached that stage... but you would only know that if you had been out in the outside world working against other skilled grapplers.

[t_niehoff]

Actually, objectively speaking, you'd probably want to go with the one that has been demonstrated thousands of times to actually work against skilled, resisting opponents vs. the one that there is no objective evidence of actually being used against skilled, resisting opponents.

Bingo. Not only that, but when there is no objective evidence of something actually working, it's generally the case that this is because it doesn't work.

[Phil Redmond]

Actually, objectively speaking, you'd probably want to go with the one that has been demonstrated thousands of times to actually work against skilled, resisting opponents vs. the one that there is no objective evidence of actually being used against skilled, resisting opponents.
All physically competitive endeavors should adhere to this idea. Unfortunately regarding martial arts in particular that isn't the case.

[Ultimatewingchun]

...I have one last comment to make about this whole grovit/catch wrestling discussion.
AND A VERY INTERESTING COMMENT, I believe...Dale/Knifefighter...

My introduction to this type of move was with Tony Cecchine's catch wrestling instructionals, the first set of which I bought back around 2003-2004...and Tony referred to it as the figure four front choke (when he got it around the windpipe, and the figure four front facelock when he did the cross face).

Here's the choke, as Tony taught it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73XXj1vxt8s

THE FIRST TIME I MENTIONED THIS MOVE ON THIS FORUM...some years ago...
you, Dale Franks, posted that you, yourself once got 'smoked' by it in one of your mma fights/losses.

These were pretty much your exact words as I remember them: "LOL, I once got smoked by that move."

Now over the course of the last 5 years or so, I learned this Lancashire cacc (Wigan, England) version of the move (ie.- the Grovit that you saw Billy Robinson do) - and I have found it to be more high percentage while rolling competitively...

more so than Tony's preference for going for the choke and while using his other hand on the guy's trapesius instead of the tricep capture.

(In both moves on Tony Cecchine's instructionals - the crossface and the choke - Tony puts his hand on the trapesius)...

BUT with the tricep capture that guys like Billy Robinson, Karl Gotch, and others do)...it's much harder to counter and escape - because that arm is no longer free.

And as I said in an earlier post, the crossface is easier to get than the choke is.

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

And this, btw, Dale, is bull5hit:

"Most sub-grapplers have been exposed to all of the techniques shown on that clip by the time they have reached intermediate stage. The reason you don't see them being used is because 99% of them don't work 99% of the time, as most of us have figured out by the time we have reached that stage... but you would only know that if you had been out in the outside world working against other skilled grapplers." (Knifefighter)

***BASED upon your almost complete non-knowledge of what catch wrestling was all about - an ignorance you demonstrated time-and-again on a thread you did putting down catch at least 4 years ago (if not longer)...

ie.- for example, you didn't even know that the catch strategy was to always wrestle for a top dominant position while simultaneously always looking for a sub to go for - hence the term: "catch any hold you can"...and you eventually admitted as such (that you didn't know that at the time about how much catch valued getting on top)... but NOW you expect us to believe that when you were just an "intermediate" BJJ submission grappler (ie.- many years earlier than the thread in question) - you nonetheless had already seen all those catch subs and setups - and knew how to deal with them.

Riiiiiiiight !!!

[lkfmdc]

Erik Paulson is a black belt in BJJ, trained in Japan with many of the "greats" there who had studied with Gotch and also happens to be one of the best respected trainers in the world.

While he does some "catch" moves, he firmly believes you FIRST learn BJJ position and movement and HIGH PERCENTAGE MOVES and then you can find the things in catch that work

By far, most of the people trying to do "catch" (1) lack the basic wrestling skills that the so called "greats" actually had and (2) are looking for a "magic bullet" that doesn't exist!

[Ultimatewingchun]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :cool: :rolleyes: ;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

From 1:09-1:27 of the first vid posted on this thread (located within the very first post on the thread)...

please take a good look at where those guys are throwing those punches - and how they're throwing them - and tell me:

What you think of it from a wing chun point of view?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM57M8LBJqg

[Ultimatewingchun]

Now let's add some kicking - in what is a similar punching strategy...to what the two guys in the vid I just alluded to on my previous post did...

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

and what do you see now, from a wing chun point of view?

[-木叶-]

Thanks for the nice clip showing Wing Chun's principle of
后发先制人，"attacking later than your opponent but still able to neutralize him".

[t_niehoff]

Quite frankly, from my perspective, that's not WCK -- that's kickboxing with a few WCK-type moves thrown in. And, it's not even good kickboxing.

Seeing people play-fighting at low intensity with unskilled guys doesn't show anything meaningful.

[t_niehoff]

Now over the course of the last 5 years or so, I learned this Lancashire cacc (Wigan, England) version of the move (ie.- the Grovit that you saw Billy Robinson do) - and I have found it to be more high percentage while rolling competitively...


"Rolling competitively" against whom?

You don't seem to understand that this is THE significant question.

In my view, if someone hasn't put in hundreds of hours rolling with competent sub grapplers (what it takes to earn a blue belt), then they simply don't and can't have the experience, skill, or understanding of sub grappling to know what they are talking about.

[Ultimatewingchun]

You don't seem to understand, Terence...Without some visual evidence from you...
- about what you can do -

what you say "has" to be done about this or that - means nothing to me.

And I highly suspect that I'm not the only one around here with that opinion.

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


Back to the thread: Crosstraining & Wing Chun

[Ultimatewingchun]

Here's what I see from 1:09-1:27 on this vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM57M8LBJqg

I see two guys throwing punches (and blocks, slips, parries, etc.) along 2 centerlines - and quite often doing the defense and offense almost simultaneously...and those 2 centerlines are actually their shoulder lines (running down their bodies vertically)....while they both, all the while, protected their main centerline...

and doing all of this while using longer range boxing-type punches and footwork - longer and more mobile than what is "conventionally" done within a strict wing chun framework.

Only once during that entire exchange did someone throw a punch that was aimed at a different line other than at a target located somewhere along the opponent's shoulder line that was parallel to the hand they were punching with.

In other words, fighter A was almost always using his left hand to attack and defend on the line normally used and occupied by fighter B's right hand, and he used his right hand to fight against the line normally occupied and used by fighter B's left hand.

And fighter B was doing the same thing.

Not chasing hands, but chasing valuable real estate. By doing this, they maximize their chances that they either safely bridge or they safely hit a target.

Think of it as two sets of dueling arms on two different centerlines.

And I find that very efficient, and very interesting!

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

And one more thing: at 1:25 the fighter with the dark shirt actually starts to block/deflect a punch with a bong sao - and then quickly withdrew it when his opponent snapped his punch back.

[Pacman]

"Rolling competitively" against whom?

You don't seem to understand that this is THE significant question.

In my view, if someone hasn't put in hundreds of hours rolling with competent sub grapplers (what it takes to earn a blue belt), then they simply don't and can't have the experience, skill, or understanding of sub grappling to know what they are talking about.

you see, only terrence trains with "competent" people

apparently everyone else with an opinion (especially a conflicting one) trains with this guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAWFBbQa_84

[Knifefighter]

.
THE FIRST TIME I MENTIONED THIS MOVE ON THIS FORUM...some years ago...
you, Dale Franks, posted that you, yourself once got 'smoked' by it in one of your mma fights/losses.!
And that's the version that works, as said in my post above (better with the hand closer to the bicep, though).



Now over the course of the last 5 years or so, I learned this Lancashire cacc (Wigan, England) version of the move (ie.- the Grovit that you saw Billy Robinson do) - and I have found it to be more high percentage while rolling competitively...!
The fact is the Billy Robinson version is much easier to counter. Since you don't compete, you wouldn't know, though.






***BASED upon your almost complete non-knowledge of what catch wrestling was all about - an ignorance you demonstrated time-and-again on a thread you did putting down catch at least 4 years ago (if not longer)...

ie.- for example, you didn't even know that the catch strategy was to always wrestle for a top dominant position while simultaneously always looking for a sub to go for - hence the term: "catch any hold you can"...and you eventually admitted as such (that you didn't know that at the time about how much catch valued getting on top)... but NOW you expect us to believe that when you were just an "intermediate" BJJ submission grappler (ie.- many years earlier than the thread in question) - you nonetheless had already seen all those catch subs and setups - and knew how to deal with them.

Riiiiiiiight !!!

LOL... I was introduced to Catch before you even started grappling. I have a tape of a seminar that Tony did out here with a bunch of guys that I trained with when I was a BJJ blue belt. We were all working all those moves back then. Since we competed, it didn't take too long to figure out most of them were low percentage.

And speaking of being full of sh!t, I would never "admit" that I didn't know about Catch's top game focus... it's obvious to anyone who's ever seen it that that is the main focus. The bottom game is woefully inadequate.

And speaking of being woefully inadequate, if you guys competed you would have figured out a system that concentrates on the top game needs a much bigger emphasis on takedowns and much less on b.s. moves. There is a reason that folkstyle, freestyle and Greco have such a huge emphasis on takedowns.

[t_niehoff]

You don't seem to understand, Terence...Without some visual evidence from you...
- about what you can do -

what you say "has" to be done about this or that - means nothing to me.

And I highly suspect that I'm not the only one around here with that opinion.

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


Back to the thread: Crosstraining & Wing Chun

Victor, nothing I expect will ever change YOUR mind. You are irrational and don't make up your mind based on good evidence or reason. You make up your mind based on what you want to be true.

For example, you are a rank novice at grappling and haven't spent any significant time grappling with competent grapplers -- you only grapple for the most part with your "students". Yet this doesn't stop you from having firm, even unwavering, convictions about matters pertaining to what is good or bad in grappling. Nor does it stop you from teaching others grappling (an example of the blind leading the blind). Even though you live near several world class grappling schools, you've never venture to visit them or train with them. You ignore what proven experts like Dale (a BJJ BB) have to say about grappling. You opine that your grovit or grommit or whatever is a better percentage move than the guillotine (which is one of the top 5 most common subs in MMA) yet can't provide any evidence of it being used successfully in either sub grappling or MMA events. So why would any reasonable person listen to your views on grappling?

You make up some silly list of your "Top 30" moves, yet fail to appreciate that the guard (both passing it and fighting from it) is at least 50% of anyone's ground game.

So, how does video evidence of what I can do (and, it should be noted how idsingenuous you are: you haven't provided 'video evidence' either, and I could point out the Kung Fu Joe over at bullshido, a BJJ blue belt, was supposed to visit you to roll several months ago yet you keep ducking him, telling him that your working on your hook video!) in grappling change any of that? It doesn't. This is just your feeble attempt to shift the focus from your views to me. You can't provide any evidence or reason to support your views and so try to distract people from seeing that. That is the basis of all fallacies -- trying to distract.

I don't make claims about myself or about what I can do, nor do I try to tell others how they should fight BASED ON MY SKILLS. Instead, I tell them to (1) see for themselves by doing it, and (2) to seek out good, proven fighters and fight trainers, and to do what THEY do. In other words, don't do what Victor (who is a novice grappler) tells you to do but do what good, proven grapplers/fighters, like Dale, does.

Isn't that just being rational?

[t_niehoff]

you see, only terrence trains with "competent" people

apparently everyone else with an opinion (especially a conflicting one) trains with this guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAWFBbQa_84

Lots of people train with proven, competent fighters. Proven, competent fighters are easy to find -- you find them in every combative sport. You find them in boxing, in wrestling, in BJJ, in MT, in judo, in sambo, etc. Dale (knifefighter) is one.

How do any of them become competent fighters? By training with other competent fighters and by lots of realsitic training, i.e., sparring.

And fwiw, I don't think it takes a whole lot to become competent. For me, basic competence is being able to consistently handle (defeat) unskilled fighters with decent attributes who are at least your size. So a solid blue belt in BJJ would be competent sub grappler.

[Pacman]

Lots of people train with proven, competent fighters. Proven, competent fighters are easy to find -- you find them in every combative sport. You find them in boxing, in wrestling, in BJJ, in MT, in judo, in sambo, etc. Dale (knifefighter) is one.

How do any of them become competent fighters? By training with other competent fighters and by lots of realsitic training, i.e., sparring.

And fwiw, I don't think it takes a whole lot to become competent. For me, basic competence is being able to consistently handle (defeat) unskilled fighters with decent attributes who are at least your size. So a solid blue belt in BJJ would be competent sub grappler.

what's funny is that you are exactly the same as those you ridicule--its just that you are on the other side of the spectrum

instead of kissing WC nuts and everything related, you are just on the MMA sac.

and like ive said many times, whenever someone disagrees with you, you always point out that they don't train with competent fighters even when you dont know who he is!

[Pacman]

I'm not even going to refute Dale (who's trolling against catch, and with a very selectively memory) - and especially Terence - who has absolutely no idea about what goes on in my school, and an even lessor idea about who I may or may not be rolling with from time-to-time.

In fact, I just don't want to waste any more of my time debating with Terence about anything - for he's the biggest all talk/no action guy on this forum. That's a losing formula for a giant know-it-all. No thank you, Terence.

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

But I am curious about what some of you wing chun guys think as regards my last post having to do with the vid - and my idea about the two shoulder lines/centerlines?

i didnt really see boxing style punches. i think it may look more that way since they both had a lead off type stance instead of a squared off stance, so when they punched with their rear hand it looked a little like a cross--but they didnt throw their shoulder into it

their footwork was a lot better than most WC sparring vids out there. i wouldnt say its non WC footwork since WC does not really have a set stance for fighting (i know some people talk about the triangle stepping and the YJKM, but those are just tools and you are not limited to only moving with those tools).

for the most part they protected their center, but to me kevin chan when attacking didnt try to "get the center" with his footwork but just came straight at the guy in the white

i thnk the guy in the white had better footwork than kevin, and used it to "get the center" --i saw that once in that short clip

[t_niehoff]

what's funny is that you are exactly the same as those you ridicule--its just that you are on the other side of the spectrum


No, I'm not the same. I DO train with competent fighters. As I said, it's not difficult and anyone can do it. Lots of people do. For example, instead of learning grappling from videos and then practicing with your WCK students, you can do what I did-- go to a legitimate BJJ school and roll with the people there. Who can't do that? I regularly roll with people of all sizes from white to black belt, I've rollled with some world-class grapplers and even a world champion, I've rolled with guys who fought in the UFC. And in the grappling world, that's nothing special (and I certainly don't claim to be special and not even good). It's true of just about anyone who has spent significant time truly practicing sub grappling.

And doing that changes your perspective. It's fairly easy for those who've done that work to recognize those who haven't just by the things they say. If you haven't done that work yourself, you won't appreciate this fact.

But let me ask you a question: Do you think someone could become a good boxer by only sparring with poorly skilled, incompetent boxers or a good grappler only grappling with poorly skilled, incompetent grapplers? Of course not. To become good, to become even competent, we need to work with, train with, and regularly and realistically spar with good, competent people. If you want to make your WCK work against decently skilled fighters, you've got to go spar with good fighters. That's simply a lead-pipe truth. It's true of boxing and it's true of WCK.

When someone hasn't done what work, whether in sub grappling or boxing or WCK, what is their opinion worth?



instead of kissing WC nuts and everything related, you are just on the MMA sac.


It's ironic that you accuse others of your offense. I base my views on evidence. Do you understand? Evidence. Seeing whatever it is work against good people. I don't care if it is MMA or MT or boxing or WCK or BJJ or catch. What matters is that it really works against competent, skilled fighters -- not unskilled scrubs, not in playfighitng, not in your imagination, not in unrealistic exercises -- but in realsitic sparring with good people. If someone can show that, whatever it is, then I'll believe it. If they can't, I won't. It's that simple.

Victor claims, for example, that his grovit is more high percentage than a guillotine, right? Where is the evidence of that? I can see guillotines everywhere -- in sub grappling events, in MMA. It's one of the top five most common subs. I can see it work successfully and consistently against good, competent fighters. Where is the evidence that the grovit is more high percentage -- or even works consistently? That evidence doesn't exists.

It is easy to convince me though: all I need is good evidence.



and like ive said many times, whenever someone disagrees with you, you always point out that they don't train with competent fighters even when you dont know who he is!

As I said above: It's fairly easy for those who've done that work to recognize those who haven't just by the things they say. If you haven't done that work yourself, you won't appreciate this fact. For example, Dale has done that work. He will be able to tell when someone talks about grappling whether or not the speaker has put in the work too. How can he tell? Because he is intimately acquainted with the realities of what really goes on in groundfighiting, and what competent grapplers can and cannot do. And that's why he know thatl Victor hasn't a clue. Everyone who is a blue belt or above can tell Victor hasn't a clue about grappling. They can all tell he hasn't done the work, that he hasn't trained with competent grapplers. They know because they can tell by what he says he is not acquainted with the realities of what really goes on in sub grappling.

And it's the same for stand-up. When someone puts in the work with good outside strikers (boxing or MT, for example) they become intimately acquainted with what really goes on fighting at that range, they know what good strikers can do, etc. And it's easy for those people to tell when nonfighters begin spinning their theories on how to fight or use their WCK that they haven't really done it.

[Pacman]

And it's the same for stand-up. When someone puts in the work with good outside strikers (boxing or MT, for example) they become intimately acquainted with what really goes on fighting at that range, they know what good strikers can do, etc. And it's easy for those people to tell when nonfighters begin spinning their theories on how to fight or use their WCK that they haven't really done it.

thats funny, because thats the same impression i get from you.

the impression i get from you is one who has had a poor WC teacher who now thinks he knows it all because he got some new training where he mistakes aggression for skill

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm not going to continue refuting Dale about the efficiency of the grovit, as it is taught by

- Billy Robinson -

who was asked by both Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett to teach them catch submissions...

because Dale likes to troll against catch wrestling, and with a very selective memory...

and I especially won't waste my time refuting Terence Niehoff - who has absolutely no idea about what goes on in my school, and an even lesser idea about who I may or may not be rolling with from time-to-time, or who I may be sparring with in stand up and how often.

In fact, I just don't want to waste any more time debating with Terence about anything, who's
the biggest all talk/no action guy on this forum. That's a losing combo for a giant know-it-all.
No thank you, Terence.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I didnt really see boxing style punches. I think it may look more that way since they both had a lead off type stance instead of a squared off stance, so when they punched with their rear hand it looked a little like a cross--but they didnt throw their shoulder into it." (Pacman)
.................................................. ..

***I DON'T THINK it matters, whether or not the punches were pure boxing? Was there some wing chun in there? If so, how much? Did they throw enough shoulder into the rear cross to be considered a pure boxing cross? And so on.

If we're talking about crosstraining and wing chun, then we need to let FIGHT EFFICIENCY be our guide, not whether or not some pre-conceived notion of what wing chun should look like is being met - or how much "pure" wing chun (whatever that is) - should be in our mix.
.................................................. .

"Their footwork was a lot better than most WC sparring vids out there. I wouldnt say its non WC footwork since WC does not really have a set stance for fighting (I know some people talk about the triangle stepping and the YJKM, but those are just tools and you are not limited to only moving with those tools)" (Pacman)
.............................................

***NOW THIS I basically agree with, except again I would say that we shouldn't be concerned with is it wing chun footwork? Is it non-wing chun footwork?

It works.

But yet, I see what looks like some wing chun principles being used, but from a longer range...and I would say that once someone gets in close with this type of fight, there will other wing chun principles, strategies, and techniques that could come into play and be a difference maker - along with some moves/strategies from other arts that could make a lot of sense (ie.- Muay Thai elbows and knees, for example) once a very close positioning is reached.

But fight efficiency is the name of the game. Not what we want to call it.

[t_niehoff]

thats funny, because thats the same impression i get from you.

the impression i get from you is one who has had a poor WC teacher who now thinks he knows it all because he got some new training where he mistakes aggression for skill

All you have to do to find out if your beliefs and theories have any validity is go visit and spar with some competent fighters -- that's the only way to know how good your training is/was. It's very easy to do, you can even get some decent MMA fighter to give a seminar or give some privates at your school with the understanding that you can spar with him. This is the problem with the TCMA mindset: they don't want to step outside their little comfort-bubble and their little pond (where they believe they are big fishes) and really see. And that becomes a downward spiral -- the longer they don't do it, the more they recognize what would happen to them if they did, their ego doesn't want that, and so they come up with justifications for not doing it.

Your little barb shows me you don't get it. A person doesn't get skill or understanding of WCK from their "teacher" or instructor. A person can only get those things (skill and understanding) from THE WORK, from realistic sparring. You are only as good as your training/sparring partners. Hawkins said, "Yip Man didn't teach me the footwork, my opponents did."

[Wayfaring]

What sucks is not necessarily catch wrestling, but the phoney techniques that are taught but never actually taken out and tested against resisting, skilled opponents. Most people who bill themselves as "Catch-wrestlers" are looking for the "secret, magical techniques" that will give them the advantage (hmm... kind of like a lot of WC guys).

Real grapplers know that the real secret is going out and testing against resisting, skilled opponents in a wide variety of settings. Most real grapplers who do real submission training and don't specialize in BJJ are embarrassed to call themselves as Catch-wrestlers" and prefer to refer to themselves as submission grapplers.

There just aren't that many catch wrestlers around. There are pockets of them here and there. Some of them do adequate testing and roll with other skilled grapplers including top BJJ people like Barnett, Paulson, Sakuraba, etc. Probably even Tony C's main Chicago training location has reasonable rolling. But he's got that long distance DVD / cell phone advice / video evaluation thing going, and it just doesn't substitute for the hours rolling with quality people. Even if people do go train in Chicago once or twice a year. You need people more advanced and less advanced to roll with to progress, as you well know. We don't really know how much of that Victor has going on, but encourage him to get more going.

Most people who do catch and call themselves sub grapplers do so not because they are ashamed of catch wrestling, but more that they also study a blended set of submission grappling. In fact, there's a case to be made that "submission grappling" is kind of an all-inclusive term like "MMA". Some, like Barnett, call themselves exclusively "catch wrestlers", regardless of whether they've picked up a sambo leg attack progression or BJJ guard progression.

Your point about getting out and testing in a wide variety of settings is a really vital one, with catch, BJJ, everything. BJJ has spread so much like a virus that now you have BJJ black belts that aren't doing that. Some do, and are known, some don't.

[monji112000]

why not start a whole area based on grappling.... seems to be a popular topic.. at least for Wing Chun people. :D


I'm not going to continue refuting Dale about the efficiency of the grovit, as it is taught by

- Billy Robinson -

who was asked by both Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett to teach them catch submissions...

because Dale likes to troll against catch wrestling, and with a very selective memory...

and I especially won't waste my time refuting Terence Niehoff - who has absolutely no idea about what goes on in my school, and an even lesser idea about who I may or may not be rolling with from time-to-time, or who I may be sparring with in stand up and how often.

In fact, I just don't want to waste any more time debating with Terence about anything, who's
the biggest all talk/no action guy on this forum. That's a losing combo for a giant know-it-all.
No thank you, Terence.

Have you pulled the "grovit" off in sparring match? tournament? anything other than a willing person? I gave it a go to give you a fair chance.. I have a easier time getting guillotines.. (I could not personally pull it off despite several attempts) The fact is that Tonny has never competed and he refuses to compete in any grappling tournament. that seems to keep his opinions and techniques outside of practical in allot of cases. Standing submissions are hard to pull off, with some exceptions. you have little control of opponent.. with a very skilled person fighting someone with no skill you can do many amazing things.. but who really cares?? Thats like saying a world class Thai Boxer can pull off some amazing kicking combinations on my mother in law..
why not put a flying omoplata on your list too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSMi3z3KFFE

hell here is a friend of my teachers doing one in a tournament:
around 1:30 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XloMyES--A4

[Knifefighter]

Some of them do adequate testing and roll with other skilled grapplers including top BJJ people like Barnett, Paulson, Sakuraba, etc.
And those are the guys that are using the same workable techniques as the rest of us. Those aren't the guys I am talking about. I'm talking about the guys like Victor who have never gotten out there and used their techniques against other decent grapplers and so, really don't have a clue about what works and what doesn't.

As far as trolling Catch, why would I have a problem with it if it worked?

[Knifefighter]

thats funny, because thats the same impression i get from you.

the impression i get from you is one who has had a poor WC teacher who now thinks he knows it all because he got some new training where he mistakes aggression for skill

Since there are so many bad teachers in WC, that has to say something about the system as a whole.

[monji112000]

Isn't catch anti gaurd??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upFTIXL2KKo
I'm not hating on Josh, but when you have a more dominant , strong, better skilled opponent your going to be on the bottom. Maybe Catch alone isn't a good idea for a grappling tournament. JMO;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

If it works then you don't have a problem with it? Great, then here's what I suggest you do, Dale.

Go back and really study this vid very carefully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4


Practice the move a hundred times (at least) - and show the vid (or teach the move) to a grappling friend of yours - who also makes it his business to get all the details and gets good with the grovit.

Then put him in the grovit and start cranking it. See how often he taps, and how often he escapes. And allow him to do the same to you.

And then, after you see the effectiveness of the hold, start working with setups.

And after you get good with that - then see if the move can work for you against a skilled, resisting opponent.

But if you come back the day-after-tomorrow and post that the moves sucks, you're kidding nobody but yourself. Because this move takes some time to get good with, no doubt about it.

[TenTigers]

Since there are so many bad teachers in WC, that has to say something about the system as a whole.
it says nothing about the system. Ever since Bruce Lee, people have been flocking to Wing Chun, and as it is with TKD, Kempo, and other Martial Arts that became very popular, huge numbers of people decided to teach, make money, water down the system, teach before they were ready, thought they "Got It", learned from DVD'S, Distance Learning, etc. It is simply the result of over exposure.
That's like saying hamburgers suck because of White Castle and McDonald's.

[monji112000]

If it works then you don't have a problem with it? Great, then here's what I suggest you do, Dale.

Go back and really study this vid very carefully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4


Practice the move a hundred times (at least) - and show the vid (or teach the move) to a grappling friend of yours - who also makes it his business to get all the details and gets good with the grovit.

Then put him in the grovit and start cranking it. See how often he taps, and how often he escapes. And allow him to do the same to you.

And then, after you see the effectiveness of the hold, start working with setups.

And after you get good with that - then see if the move can work for you against a skilled, resisting opponent.

But if you come back the day-after-tomorrow and post that the moves sucks, you're kidding nobody but yourself. Because this move takes some time to get good with, no doubt about it.
I'm not trying to be a douche bag or anything but have you actually pulled it off during a sparring match? or tournament?

[Knifefighter]

it says nothing about the system. Ever since Bruce Lee, people have been flocking to Wing Chun, and as it is with TKD, Kempo, and other Martial Arts that became very popular, huge numbers of people decided to teach, make money, water down the system, teach before they were ready, thought they "Got It", learned from DVD'S, Distance Learning, etc. It is simply the result of over exposure.
That's like saying hamburgers suck because of White Castle and McDonald's.

Why don't BJJ, Muay Thai, wrestling, boxing or judo have that problem?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yes, I've pulled it off in sparring/rolling matches a number of times. Now of course, the inevitable cry is going to be, against whom? Where? When? Exactly how many times? Etc.

Don't bother with that.

Just go work with the move, as I suggested, and then see what's what. My guess is, you're going to keep the move in your arsenal once you get it, because it can be done from lots of places, ie.- standing, kneeling on both legs, on one leg, etc.

And quite frankly, the pain that this hold causes when done right can be excruciating. If he's got a 20 inch neck, lol. But if not, you can really immobilize and hurt someone with this.

Am I saying that the figure four choke variation of the grovit, or the guillotine, are no good? No. Not at all. But I am saying that it's been my experience that this move works, and that it's often easier to get the crossface than it is to get your arm wrapped around his throat/carotid area.

That's all.

[Knifefighter]

If it works then you don't have a problem with it? Great, then here's what I suggest you do, Dale.

Go back and really study this vid very carefully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4


Practice the move a hundred times (at least) - and show the vid (or teach the move) to a grappling friend of yours - who also makes it his business to get all the details and gets good with the grovit.

Then put him in the grovit and start cranking it. See how often he taps, and how often he escapes. And allow him to do the same to you.

And then, after you see the effectiveness of the hold, start working with setups.

And after you get good with that - then see if the move can work for you against a skilled, resisting opponent.

But if you come back the day-after-tomorrow and post that the moves sucks, you're kidding nobody but yourself. Because this move takes some time to get good with, no doubt about it.

Here's a much better idea. Enter a submission grappling tourney. There are many in the New York area. Show a clip of you tapping people in the tourney with the move.

I've already worked this move and countless variations on it more times than you've worked all your moves combined, so I already know what's what.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Why am I not surprised by this comeback, Dale?

Again, you're the man who said that "if it works, why would I be against it." Go see if it works.

Because I don't believe this for a second:

"I've already worked this move and countless variations on it more times than you've worked all your moves combined, so I already know what's what." (Knifefighter)
.................................................. ...

***IT'S TAUGHT BY A CATCH WRESTLER WHO WAS SOUGHT OUT BY KAZUSHI SAKURABA AND JOSH BARNETT.

Maybe there's something to this, huh?! :rolleyes:

[monji112000]

Yes, I've pulled it off in sparring/rolling matches a number of times. Now of course, the inevitable cry is going to be, against whom? Where? When? Exactly how many times? Etc.


Hey if you feel its a move you like, who am I to tell you wrong. I have gone through many periods of think one move works and then thinking it didn't. I keep a open mind to most things. I have personally at one point felt rubberguard was the best thing since sliced bread.. after many MANY failed experiences with it including many tournaments.. I have removed it from my list of tools. Thats me, I am casting no judgement on anyone else.

If I may question your move, I found that the guys head slipped out if and when I got the position. This is actually something I found also happens if I'm not careful with normal guillotines. I have adopted a more blood choke version of the guillotine that does not require you to pull up, but use your chest to hold the opponent in place. This choke is very common many people do it, Tony does a crappy version of it. I remember seeing Kenny Florian doing a good version somewhere.

Again if your happy with it great, I wouldn't bother with it.. but maybe next year I'll change my mind. I said before I don't like Neck cranks I have had allot of bad experience with them. The only neck crank I have ever found to work everytime is the twister, even then sometimes you need the defcon.

I would enjoy a video clip of you competing.. hey I post a long time ago of me competing. I'm not amazing grappler..

[Knifefighter]

Why am I not surprised by this comeback, Dale?

Again, you're the man who said that "if it works, why would I be against it." Go see if it works.

Because I don't believe this for a second:

"I've already worked this move and countless variations on it more times than you've worked all your moves combined, so I already know what's what." (Knifefighter)

That, and variations of it, are standard head control techniques in wrestling. All high school wrestlers learn those variations. I've been wrestling since high school, so yes, I have done it, not hundreds, but thousands of times.

All the variations are great head control techniques. They are not good finishing techniques, however... which is precisely why it is legal in high school, collegiate and international wrestling competitions and the guillotine is not.

[TenTigers]

Why don't BJJ, Muay Thai, wrestling, boxing or judo have that problem?
are you kidding me? Muay Thai Fitness Kickboxing classes are all the rage. And there will be more coming. Ever since Tony Jaa mentioned Muay Boran and Muay Chaya, people have been claiming to know it and teach it-and Jaa isn't even mainstream.
Gracies came out with their Gracie systems or whatever-marketed for the McDojo, and now they have a video distance learning program. Watch...just watch.
Judo doesn't have it now, because it is not as mainstream, but in the sixties, when guys like Bruce Tegner were around, there was very bad judo.
Wrestling? High Schools get in the best coaches they can. There aren't many straight out wrestling schools, but if it becomes big enough, you can bet your eye-teeth that there will be McWrestling as well.

[Ultimatewingchun]

So Dale, you're saying that what goes on in this vid, and especially from 2:30-4:05...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4

...you're saying that you were doing exactly this from back in your high school days. Hummm...

That's amazing, Dale. :rolleyes:

[Ultimatewingchun]

"If I may question your move, I found that the guys head slipped out if and when I got the position. This is actually something I found also happens if I'm not careful with normal guillotines. I have adopted a more blood choke version of the guillotine that does not require you to pull up, but use your chest to hold the opponent in place." (monji)
....................................

***ONE of the big keys to getting this is that you have to capture his arm by the tricep immediately - as you're just about completing the crossface with your other arm. So you get the completed figure four really quickly.

And yes, you've got to use your chest to hold him in place - and do that very quickly also - so he's really locked in before you actually lower your hips, move in, and crank.

[Knifefighter]

So Dale, you're saying that what goes on in this vid, and especially from 2:30-4:05...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq0OrVgEFs4

...you're saying that you were doing exactly this from back in your high school days. Hummm...

That's amazing, Dale. :rolleyes:

Why is that amazing? They are just variations on crossfacing and front headlocks from the top. Crossfaces from the side are much nastier.

[Ultimatewingchun]

You're being just a little too vague, Dale. Did you actually do this move back in high school
exactly as you see it being done between 2:30-4:05 on the vid?

[Knifefighter]

You're being just a little too vague, Dale. Did you actually do this move back in high school
exactly as you see it being done between 2:30-4:05 on the vid?

Of course not. You can only do it the way he is demonstrating it when you have a person who is letting you put in on like that and just lets his body and arms hang there. When you actually do it for real, your opponent hand fights you and changes his body angle.

That's the problem with most carney finishes. They need either a compliant opponent or a huge discrepancy in size and strength. And the problem with not competing... it's too easy to be fooled by the "demonstrations" of the hucksters.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay, I get it. You don't know (or haven't bothered to try and learn) the setups that can be used to get this. So for you it therefore just becomes a carny move.

I get it.

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


Back to Crosstraining & Wing Chun.

[t_niehoff]

Okay, I get it. You don't know (or haven't bothered to try and learn) the setups that can be used to get this. So for you it therefore just becomes a carny move.

I get it.


No, you don't. To "get it" -- to have an intelligent basis for talking about grappling -- you need to go and do hundreds of hours training/sparring with competent grapplers.

[Ultimatewingchun]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :cool:

[taojkd]

Why don't BJJ, Muay Thai, wrestling, boxing or judo have that problem?

Sorry, normally i agree with most of your posts, opinions etc. however, all martial arts that gain popularity (especially in the US) fall victim to this eventually.
https://www.graciecombat.com/flare/next

And anyone who teaches "kickboxing" nowadays is calling it MT. It will get watered down a bit and there will be plenty of "bad mma sparring" vids on Youtube to join in the ranks of "bad WC sparring" vids.

Then the forums will get really fun!!

[t_niehoff]

Keep your head in the sand.

You are arguing with a BJJ BB who has competed in both sub grappling and MMA about grappling! You don't know 1% of what he does. This is like a guy who has never played organized ball, plays a bit of pick-up with his buddies, and thinks he can tell an NBA player about basketball. Delusionsal.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Hey, Niehoff...I'll take Billy Robinson's word for it over Dale Franks' any time, any place.

And as usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

AGAIN, THE FIGURE FOUR FRONT FACELOCK IS TAUGHT BY A NUMBER OF CATCH WRESTLERS WHO TRAINED IN WIGAN, ENGLAND...INCLUDING BILLY ROBINSON....THE SAME BILLY ROBINSON WHO WAS ASKED BY KAZUSHI SAKURABA AND JOSH BARNETT TO TEACH THEM CATCH SUBMISSIONS.

Enough said.

[t_niehoff]

Hey, Niehoff...I'll take Billy Robinson's word for it over Dale Franks' any time, any place.


Why take ANYONE's word for it? Let's just see the evidence. The problem is, Victor, that you can't provide any and you can't even discuss the issue intelligently since you have no good, significant experience grappling. Yet, in your ignorance you want to argue with someone who has tons of genuine experience. Like I said, it is like a scrub basketball player trying to argue basketball with an NBA player.



And as usual, you don't know what you're talking about.


I know that you haven't a clue about grappling since you haven't put in the requisite work to develop any significant skill of knowledge.



AGAIN, THE FIGURE FOUR FRONT FACELOCK IS TAUGHT BY A NUMBER OF CATCH WRESTLERS WHO TRAINED IN WIGAN, ENGLAND...INCLUDING BILLY ROBINSON....THE SAME BILLY ROBINSON WHO WAS ASKED BY KAZUSHI SAKURABA AND JOSH BARNETT TO TEACH THEM CATCH SUBMISSIONS.

Enough said.

And the same figure four face lock that we never see Sakuraba or Barnett (when he is able to figure out how to cycle his roids) use! I guess Billyjust forgot to teach them that one? ;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

The problem is that you, Terence Niehoff, refuse to know when to just shut up and learn something that you didn't know before. Because your arrogance is only equalled by your ignorance, ie.- you basically know nothing about catch as catch can wrestling....

but you want to try and convince people that you know all there really is to know.

So you don't know hardly anything about catch. And your knowledge of wing chun is also extremely limited (clearly and undoubtedly the reason why you never post a single vid of yourself)...and your skill level in ANY other form of martial arts that you constantly go on-and-on about (boxing, BJJ, Muay Thai, kickboxing, etc.) is also obviously very low level...and again, this is the reason why - under any and all circumstances - you have always refused (and will always refuse)...

to post a vid of yourself doing ANYTHING.

What you are good at, however, is the ability to try and turn virtually every thread you participate in...into a referendum on whether or not the other people on the thread can live up to the standards that you want to set for them - and that you pretend to be an expert in knowing about...

which are the very same standards that you, yourself, can never fulfill.

In short, Terence, you are a joke, which is why virtually the entire wing chun forum had to laugh at the idea that the first character that appears in this vid - is really you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5SaNBjLhg&NR=1

[Knifefighter]

Victor-
If you are privy to this great grappling system of these workable techniques, why don't you just go enter some grappling tourneys? The results there would speak a thousand times louder than anything you could ever say here... of course, that's probably what you are worried about.

One really has to wonder about the credentials of a WC instructor who also bills himself as a grappling instructor, but seems to be 100% video trained and has never entered a single grappling competition.

[Wayfaring]

Of course not. You can only do it the way he is demonstrating it when you have a person who is letting you put in on like that and just lets his body and arms hang there. When you actually do it for real, your opponent hand fights you and changes his body angle.

Standing gromits, fig 4 facelocks, and guillotines IME are not real high percentage as finishing moves. There is simply too much space available from the feet and it's too hard to shut it completely down against skilled opponents who are scrambling. Now Kenny Florian teaches a standing guillotine that actually looks very similar to this video - he folds the other arm over the shoulder. I haven't found that to be any higher percentage finishing either, not that you can't ever get it. If you can manage to get a hand in to the neck without it being grabbed, and a chest on top of the back, an even nastier sub is that 10 finger guillotine right under the adam's apple - that gets the gag/choke reflex as well as a windpipe choke.

A real common defense to this is to hand fight - grab the wrist as it comes under, change angles to go into the arm straight to make space, then back up popping your head out. That leaves you in perfect position to arm drag and take the back.

Higher percentage options again IME from there are sprawling to take the opponent to the knees and remove space, shooting the neck hand deep to the far tricep to set up guillotines or a peruvian necktie, or a gator roll to a side choke. Scrambling to the side for a wrestler's side ride or taking the back is also higher percentage.

But again, that's just my .02 from live rolling. YMMV.

[Wayfaring]

you basically know nothing about catch as catch can wrestling....


Butting in here - apologies ahead of time. You know from what I've experimented with in the catch hooks, once you get them on they are very effective. It's the setting them up that is harder against better grapplers - the entry into them. I've worked the wristlocks most recently, and in certain circumstances they finish things quickly. If you don't get the entry exact though they are easier to power out of than their BJJ counterparts on entry. In that my opinion currently is they are similar in my experience to some of the aikido locks - that are effective if you have exact entry/setup. I'm still working them to get better at timing the entry.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yes , it is all in the setups, I agree. And when I included the standing figure four facelock and the standing double wristlock as part of the top 30 - I was thinking (as I mentioned at the time)...primarily streetfight situation (although they are valuable for sparring/rolling, tournaments, as well)...

because once strikes are included, then quite often the setup will be a punching combination, a knee to the body or face, an elbow strike, a followup to your nicely-done sprawl if he attempts to take you down, etc.

That doesn't mean that you can't get these holds firmly secured coming off a wrestling/grappling setup, ie.-a snap down, from the defensive sprawl just mentioned, arm wrestling with head control, your own offensive front headlock with overhook arm capture sprawl takedown, (instead of following up with a go-behind), etc...

but when we also include strikes, the percentages go up.

[Knifefighter]

but when we also include strikes, the percentages go up.

LOL @ Victor trying to be a grappling/Catch authority. If anything, when you include strikes, the percentage will probably go down even more that you will finish with that move.

Victor, let me ask you this. If a karate teacher bought some WC videos, studied them and then trained them with his students for a few years, how much of an authority on WC do you think he would be?

[t_niehoff]

The problem is that you, Terence Niehoff, refuse to know when to just shut up and learn something that you didn't know before. Because your arrogance is only equalled by your ignorance, ie.- you basically know nothing about catch as catch can wrestling....


Victor, I don't claim to know anything about catch wrestling. My point is that YOU don't know anything either. You haven't done the WORK of training/sparring hundreds of hours with good, skillful grapplers to EARN grapppling knowledge (catch or otherwise).

Nor do I or anyone need to know anything about catch or grappling to be able to look at what things do go on in sub grappling and MMA competitions and see that your figure-four face lock isn't a high percentage sub.



but you want to try and convince people that you know all there really is to know.


No, I don't. I don't want to be taken as an authority because I'm not. I never claim to be. But what you don't grasp is neither are you. At least I've spent my time grappling getting first-rate instruction and regularly and consistently rolling with proven, skillful grapplers. However, I know that even the hundreds of hours I have spent doing that doesn't make me an authority.



So you don't know hardly anything about catch. And your knowledge of wing chun is also extremely limited (clearly and undoubtedly the reason why you never post a single vid of yourself)...and your skill level in ANY other form of martial arts that you constantly go on-and-on about (boxing, BJJ, Muay Thai, kickboxing, etc.) is also obviously very low level...and again, this is the reason why - under any and all circumstances - you have always refused (and will always refuse)...

to post a vid of yourself doing ANYTHING.


Keep trying to change the subject from your lack of skill and knowledge of grappling to me.

Your llist of "important moves" contains wrestling and boxing and MT and catch, yet have you EVER gone and trained with proven, competent practitioners of those arts? No. Have you ever put in the requisite time training with proven, competent practitioners of those arts to develop skill? No. How have you learned your boxing, your wrestling, your MT, your catch? Is there a common theme? And you have the gall to teach these things! And to believe your views on these things should be taken seriously.



What you are good at, however, is the ability to try and turn virtually every thread you participate in...into a referendum on whether or not the other people on the thread can live up to the standards that you want to set for them - and that you pretend to be an expert in knowing about...


I'm sure that I do "ruin" many threads for people like you by pointing out that you really don't know what you are talking about.



which are the very same standards that you, yourself, can never fulfill.


The difference between you and me, Victor, is I'm not doing what you are doing -- I'm not trying to tell people how to grapple or how to fight -- I tell them go train with good, proven, competent grapplers, put the time in on the mats with skillful grapplers, listen to people who can really do what they talk about (not in theory but in evidence), none of which you do or say to do. In fact, you do just the opposite.



In short, Terence, you are a joke, which is why virtually the entire wing chun forum had to laugh at the idea that the first character that appears in this vid - is really you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5SaNBjLhg&NR=1

These childish attempts at redicule just show how you ahve nothing of SUBSTANCE, either evidence or reason, to offer.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Just not interested, nor do I feel it's necessary, to continue answering the two of you. My points about the real issues here have been made, and I stand by them. If you can get a guillotine, you can probably get a figure four facelock. And yes, you can get a standing double wristlock. Sakuraba proved that numerous times. No need to continue having to explain why and how. As for the rest of the crap coming out of the mouth/keyboard of the two of you - stick it! :eek: :cool:

[Ultimatewingchun]

Finally took the time to watch all these Bas Rutten vids you posted earlier, Phil...and yeah, THANKS !!! :D They're awesome. Had only seen one or two of them before your post.

If interested in Crosstraining & Wing Chun, take notice!

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


QUOTE=Phil Redmond;949236]I decided to add these clips as well. You guys can thank me later. :D

1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQVaTEPOsTA&feature=related

2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVqCgBEei0o&feature=related

3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCox0f69a04&feature=related

4.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mvp59EDEOc&feature=related

5.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81N4C4Bzc6Y&feature=related

6.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE8JzdolJy4&feature=related

7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrO33qgzZxE&feature=related

8.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8UZmA4PCKM&feature=related

9.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvVnsaPB9PU&feature=related

10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkDkUPZa4iE&feature=related

11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtV_6llTaPE&feature=related[/QUOTE]

[Phil Redmond]

. . . .Victor, let me ask you this. If a karate teacher bought some WC videos, studied them and then trained them with his students for a few years, how much of an authority on WC do you think he would be?
Dale, what's your opinion on the Gracie "online" University ???
https://www.gracieuniversity.com/LC/subject_view.aspx?c=63QJ4TGT7X&n=28

[Wayfaring]

Dale, what's your opinion on the Gracie "online" University ???
https://www.gracieuniversity.com/LC/subject_view.aspx?c=63QJ4TGT7X&n=28

I'm not Dale, so my opinion doesn't count, but I think that's Rener and Ryron (Rorian's kids) that put that stuff together if I'm not mistaken. I haven't seen the DVD's, but I've heard by reputable sources that the quality of the DVD's is high and the content is good as well. If you hear those 2 talk their intention is to make available Helio's art to people who couldn't study it otherwise.

That doesn't change the fact that anyone getting their blue or purple belt through that program exclusively is going to be cannon fodder for any athletic white belt with stripes in a competitive school. That's just the way it works in general. You've got to get out and take your lumps sooner or later, so might as well make it sooner. For the middle-aged plus and cross-training entries you could take the Chuck Norris route and have Carlos Machado sit on your head for 7 or 8 years in privates or on the set of "Walker".

fyi - here's a decent Bullshido thread on the topic if you are finding yourself with a lot of time to read:
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82251

[monji112000]

I'm not Dale, so my opinion doesn't count, but I think that's Rener and Ryron (Rorian's kids) that put that stuff together if I'm not mistaken. I haven't seen the DVD's, but I've heard by reputable sources that the quality of the DVD's is high and the content is good as well. If you hear those 2 talk their intention is to make available Helio's art to people who couldn't study it otherwise.

That doesn't change the fact that anyone getting their blue or purple belt through that program exclusively is going to be cannon fodder for any athletic white belt with stripes in a competitive school. That's just the way it works in general. You've got to get out and take your lumps sooner or later, so might as well make it sooner. For the middle-aged plus and cross-training entries you could take the Chuck Norris route and have Carlos Machado sit on your head for 7 or 8 years in privates or on the set of "Walker".

fyi - here's a decent Bullshido thread on the topic if you are finding yourself with a lot of time to read:
http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82251

has anyone rolled with people from this program here? I have. You are getting nothing more than what you would get a normal BJJ school. You are maybe getting a little more because you have video clips and nice outlines/notes on techniques and positions and you are getting much less because of the obvious lack of guidance (you may not get much of that in a school too :D).
I have experience with guys from the Royler network and JJ machado's network. I have found that the level of instruction in at the in class classes of the Combatives sucks. Its allot of the blind teaching the blind... If thats all you have then I guess its better than nothing.

[Knifefighter]

Dale, what's your opinion on the Gracie "online" University ???
https://www.gracieuniversity.com/LC/subject_view.aspx?c=63QJ4TGT7X&n=28

Nothing comes close to hands-on instruction with lots of sparring with good people.

[yodacow]

A general comment:

To develop fighting skill - regardless of our art- we need to fight. Fighting skill only comes from fighting (practice). A corollary of that is not only do we need to fight to develop fighting skill, but the quality of that fighting (the level of our opponents) is critical. You are only as good as your training/sparring partners.

So, I think it imperative that we get out and mix it up regularly and consistently with good, competent, nonWCK people -- MMAists, boxers, MT boxers, etc. Only in that way can we develop competent fighting skills.

And while this sort of training is necessary if we want to develop beyond a very low level, to develop skill in fighting with WCK, we need to actually fight with WCK. You only get good at what you practice. If you go train with boxers and box or go train with kickboxers and kickbox, then you are developing boxing or kickboxing skills, not WCK skills. You are not learning how to use your WCK.


Well said. No point learning the alphabets but unable to put it into words and sentences. No point having some lofty opinion one own wing chun skill level and lineage and yet crumble when fighting against another opponent skilled in another martial art.
To claim to be a fighter, you need to fight. Not chi sao, not drills, not against compliant non resistive partners.
Otherwise, we fullfill the public perception of wing chunners as softies because we claim our art is soft

[Ultimatewingchun]

...that was made by Dale Franks/Knifefighter...

"50% of boxing is inside fighting. And just like the outside strikes, the method of striking inside is the most effective way to generate the most power.

If you want to know how to fight most effectively on the inside with little attachment, do what boxers do. If you want to know how to fight most effectively from an attached inside environment, do what MT fighters, wrestlers and MMA fighters do.

As with anything else, look to the people who are actually doing it at the highest levels."
.................................................. ..

***HE hits on some things here that I totally agree with, but I would add that wing chun can also add significantly to your arsenal from this position of inside fighting, both from an attached (or semi-attached) environment and from a non attached (but very close range) position. And one of the ways to cultivate this is to work/experiment with various possibilites that can come from chi sao, ie.- let the flow of chi sao develop into a sort of anything goes type of sparring drill - where the "rules" of chi sao get thrown out and you just do what makes the most sense, by letting your body and instincts take over.

And completely ignore any ideas of "this is not wing chun"....just let things happen.

[Ultimatewingchun]

monji wrote this:

"You see in my perspective of Wing Chun the last place I want to be is clinching (attaching) with you. Clinching leads to going to the ground. If I come in short distance to you its not to attach its to try and end the fight. I actually believe very strongly that Lyoto Machida is a great example of Wing Chun fighting strategy. (strategy not technique)"
.............................................


***CLOSE, but no cigar in my view. Yes, Machida is good at this, and so was Mirko Cro Cop when he first came on the scene. But the truth is, imo, you can't put all your eggs into the "I don't want to go to full clinch or ground" basket.

You will find that very often you will have no choice, regardless of how good you are in your preferred range. Look at what happened to Cro Cop as time went on, and sooner-or-later the same will happen to Machida.

You have to be able to fight in all ranges, including full clinch and ground.

And this will require a paradigm shift in one's thinking, because it is true that the more you work with people skilled in clinch and ground range, the more you will see the limitations of wing chun and the necessity to crosstrain.

[Ultimatewingchun]

...on that same thread:

"The difference is that clinching is primarily designed to restrict movement. The bridge in WC is primarily for controlling the opponent's center and manipulating it to a position of advantage for finishing. It is not designed to restrict movement."
...........................................

***TRUE, that's what wing chun bridging is designed to do. But what makes you so sure that you can keep a wing chun type bridge from going to full clinch?

If you don't knock someone out with your first punch/palm strike/elbow, whatever - or at least do some serious damage on the first (or even the second) shot...and he's skilled as a non-wing chun inside fighter (ie.- Muay Thai, wrestling, BJJ, sambo,etc.)...

you could easily go to full clinch.

********Crosstraining and wing chun.

It's right there for the taking - wing chun is indeed an infight with a heavy emphasis on the close quarter bridged fighting skills learned in various chi sao and chi sao/kiu sao related drills....made to order for crosstraining in arts that get even closer.

[monji112000]

monji wrote this:

"You see in my perspective of Wing Chun the last place I want to be is clinching (attaching) with you. Clinching leads to going to the ground. If I come in short distance to you its not to attach its to try and end the fight. I actually believe very strongly that Lyoto Machida is a great example of Wing Chun fighting strategy. (strategy not technique)"
.............................................


***CLOSE, but no cigar in my view. Yes, Machida is good at this, and so was Mirko Cro Cop when he first came on the scene. But the truth is, imo, you can't put all your eggs into the "I don't want to go to full clinch or ground" basket.

You will find that very often you will have no choice, regardless of how good you are in your preferred range. Look at what happened to Cro Cop as time went on, and sooner-or-later the same will happen to Machida.

You have to be able to fight in all ranges, including full clinch and ground.

And this will require a paradigm shift in one's thinking, because it is true that the more you work with people skilled in clinch and ground range, the more you will see the limitations of wing chun and the necessity to crosstrain.
well at least you could tell me you were commenting on something I said.. its a little odd. you took what I said out of context. I didn't say I don't want to go full clinch whatever that means. I said clinching really doesn't exist in Wing Chun, the reason I believe is that it leads to the ground. I believe very strongly that if you can avoid clinching you can avoid going to the ground. Sure Machida will go to the ground (he takes people down too you know).. no issue he is a black belt in BJJ. The thing is he has studied many arts not just His families Karate. I don't think he is perfect, I just admire him and his style. I think his "spirit" of elusiveness is the same spirit of elusiveness in Wing chun.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I agree, Machida is a very good and a very elusive fighter who has been able to adapt his shotokan karate to all out nhb (or close to it) fighting, as it exists in the UFC. He's now a mixed martial artist who tries to play to his strength, ie.- standup karate fighting.

So what are you saying exactly about wing chun, clinch, and ground?

[monji112000]

I agree, Machida is a very good and a very elusive fighter who has been able to adapt his shotokan karate to all out nhb (or close to it) fighting, as it exists in the UFC. He's now a mixed martial artist who tries to play to his strength, ie.- standup karate fighting.

So what are you saying exactly about wing chun, clinch, and ground?

well my original post was in another thread. (honestly I'm not sure why I'm posting so much.. its probably because I have nothing else to do, until I can go back to training).So it had nothing to do with crosstraining.. but

If a Wing Chun fighter wanted to compete in MMA I believe Machida has setup a nice blueprint. His ability to avoid being taken down is VERY good. He has no fear of the ground. His striking has been adapted to deal with a wide variety of striker.

I personally find his striking very interesting. He doesn't put himself in harms way often. He picks his strikes very well, and is very accurate. When He smells blood he stops being elusive and goes for the kill. Its true his punches are not the most powerful but they do knock people out. So from a concept and not a technical view His striking style is very much like the Wing Chun I have been exposed too. Again not technically, but strategy. JMO

[Yoshiyahu]

Machida is he really a Wing Chun guy?????????

[anerlich]

Machida is not a Wing Chun guy.

[sihing]

Machida is not a Wing Chun guy.

Machida isn't a WC guy, but his movements and economy of motion remind me of one. He doesn't connect to someone like a WC guy would, but he moves non telegraphically, and doesn't get hit allot. All good things when fighting:)

James

[Yoshiyahu]

Machida isn't a WC guy, but his movements and economy of motion remind me of one. He doesn't connect to someone like a WC guy would, but he moves non telegraphically, and doesn't get hit allot. All good things when fighting:)

James

Thank You very much great response...

[monji112000]

Machida isn't a WC guy, but his movements and economy of motion remind me of one. He doesn't connect to someone like a WC guy would, but he moves non telegraphically, and doesn't get hit allot. All good things when fighting:)

James

Since I mentioned it, I'll go through my reasons for saying Machida has many similarities to a Good WC fighter (JMO).

1). He doesn't fight guns blazing, balls to the walls, cave man style. He moves, and times his attacks VERY WELL. When he sees a opening he attacks, when he feels danger he evades and counter attacks. This tactic is pushed heavily by my teacher. We don't do it in the same way but its a very similar idea. Machida is always thinking about being "SAFE". He will try very hard not to put himself in harm sway just to attack.

2. He uses distance, and timing to bait his opponents. He constantly keeps them at a distance were he can see everything, and doesn't allow them to dictate the fight. So its not that he fights from far away or close to the person.. its that he uses each range effectively. ALL RANGES.

3. He punches in a style considered very week, and yet he can knock people out. His punches when he smells blood remind me of Chain punches (technically they have no similarity), but they both are fast, light, and overwhelming if used correctly. Just listen to Evan's comments after the fight about machida punching him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAvF7piv-vg
check out around 7:25
Machida doesn't "trap hands" so of course he isn't going to look the way allot of people think WC looks.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Okay, so let's tke this Machida ball and run with it - in the spirit of "crosstraining and wing chun"...

As a wing chun guy with an open mind, what exactly (not just generalizations) does Machida do when he fights that you might consider adding to your arsenal, that isn't specifically wing chun, per se - but yet has earned your respect, because in some way it reminds you of wing chun?

[goju]

Victor-
If you are privy to this great grappling system of these workable techniques, why don't you just go enter some grappling tourneys? The results there would speak a thousand times louder than anything you could ever say here... of course, that's probably what you are worried about.

One really has to wonder about the credentials of a WC instructor who also bills himself as a grappling instructor, but seems to be 100% video trained and has never entered a single grappling competition.
dude i usually dont like to talk smack but you honestly need to shut up
i bit my lip to be nice about this but you seriously shouldnt walk around like a pompous *****
NO ONE has a feckin clue who youare'for all your fights there isnt crap about you online. which tell us what? they were mediocre at best
please dont come on here acting like your a big shot when your just some low level scrub mma fighter that no one has even heard of
and need i remind you, you may not even be who ever the hell dale frank supposedly is
people constantly go oline claiming they are folks they are not so too be honest you may not even be dale

[Frost]

dude i usually dont like to talk smack but you honestly need to shut up
i bit my lip to be nice about this but you seriously shouldnt walk around like a pompous *****
NO ONE has a feckin clue who youare'for all your fights there isnt crap about you online. which tell us what? they were mediocre at best
please dont come on here acting like your a big shot when your just some low level scrub mma fighter that no one has even heard of
and need i remind you, you may not even be who ever the hell dale frank supposedly is
people constantly go oline claiming they are folks they are not so too be honest you may not even be dale


Knifefighter has a very valid point, I would have thought the wing chun community (with all its lineage wars) would be the first one to question someone who has no actual experience in the art they were talking about apart from watching videos on the net. I can only imagine how people would react if someone came on here telling everyone how to train wing chun and that their way was the best and then admitted they had only learned the art from DVDs lol.

As for attacking knife fighter he unlike most here has a competition record and he is an original dog brother, since you consider him a scrub and a low level fighter what's your record?
He is also a black belt in BJJ and has submission wrestled for decades, why is giving advice on grappling and telling someone who plainly doesn't know what they are talking the cold hard facts being pompous?

[Pacman]

Knifefighter has a very valid point, I would have thought the wing chun community (with all its lineage wars) would be the first one to question someone who has no actual experience in the art they were talking about apart from watching videos on the net. I can only imagine how people would react if someone came on here telling everyone how to train wing chun and that their way was the best and then admitted they had only learned the art from DVDs lol.

As for attacking knife fighter he unlike most here has a competition record and he is an original dog brother, since you consider him a scrub and a low level fighter what's your record?
He is also a black belt in BJJ and has submission wrestled for decades, why is giving advice on grappling and telling someone who plainly doesn't know what they are talking the cold hard facts being pompous?

first post. how obvious. hello dale or dale's friend.

[-木叶-]

Knifefighter has a very valid point, I would have thought the wing chun community (with all its lineage wars) would be the first one to question someone who has no actual experience in the art they were talking about apart from watching videos on the net.


Hi,

First of all, i would like to point out, with my humble knowledge, that Sifu Victor
Parlati has trained student who has won full contact competitions, and himself
has been personally there to learn from Yip Man's first generation students.

I would like to say that i do not know him personally but i had to get this straight
when i saw this, because of your words.

[goju]

Knifefighter has a very valid point, I would have thought the wing chun community (with all its lineage wars) would be the first one to question someone who has no actual experience in the art they were talking about apart from watching videos on the net. I can only imagine how people would react if someone came on here telling everyone how to train wing chun and that their way was the best and then admitted they had only learned the art from DVDs lol.

As for attacking knife fighter he unlike most here has a competition record and he is an original dog brother, since you consider him a scrub and a low level fighter what's your record?
He is also a black belt in BJJ and has submission wrestled for decades, why is giving advice on grappling and telling someone who plainly doesn't know what they are talking the cold hard facts being pompous?

as i said for all we know thi isnt even the real dale franks wo ever the hell that is it could judst be some fat teenager who plays with his foam nunchuks in his mothers back yard impersonating a person online this happens all the time

and again so he says wheres the video proof of him fighting? i want to see how good he is because with the way hes conducting himself on here( which pretty much everyone else noted he was acting like a **** as well) i think he should post a video of his fights so we can all see :)

bascially all it boils down to is dale is a bjj black belt woopdeee frickin dooo mate this has nothing to do with wing chun and his rediculous comments prove his understanding of the art is limited at best
as far as my record goes i just turned 20but i am interested in competing in nhb tournamentsive boxed all my life and my specialty is goju ryu karate

[Ultimatewingchun]

goju, pacman, and my friend from Singapore (whose remarks I appreciate):


I've hard harsh back-and-forth words on this forum with Dale Franks (knifefighter) for years now; about wing chun, about catch wrestling, about a bunch of things. But it happens less-and-less now, because I finally caught on to what he's about. He's a mixture of your basic troll and a guy who has accomplished a lot in martial arts, and now that he's in his mid-late 50's, he wants a lot of props coming his way. After all, he does have a huge ego as well, as you guys have probably already surmised.

Now just how good is he? Well he is a BJJ blackbelt who studied under Royce Gracie, so he's a very good grappler. (I saw some of his vids that were posted some years ago of one of his mma matches - which he won with an armlock).

And he's skilled in standup striking and kicking, and clinch work. How good was the striking and kicking that I saw? It looked okay, but not as good as his grappling. And his Dog Brothers stick fighting which I saw some vid(s) of also looked good. All in all, the guy is an accomplished martial artist, no doubt about it. But he's also a small man physically, which I think contributes to his arrogant attitude (as it seems he's always trying to prove something: very often an indicator of some sort of Napoleanic "superiority-hiding-a-feeling-of-inferiority" complex). And he's also very strong, and in very good physical condition, as I heard from someone who's met him.

BUT HERE'S THE POINT FOR YOU AND ME HERE ON THIS FORUM IN 2009:

What Dale loves to do is hi-jack threads and turn them into some sort of "I know what I'm talking about, I've got the experience and the skills, and if you disagree with me about basically anything I say, then all that means is that you don't know 5hit."

NOW SOMETIMES THIS CAN GET COMPLICATED BECAUSE QUITE OFTEN HIS CRITICISMS OF WING CHUN, AND WING CHUN TRAINING METHODS, ARE TRUE.

He did spend 4-5 years way back in the day studying wing chun with somebody, so he knows something of what he speaks; and unfortunately, from what I've gathered after reading so many of his posts for about 5-6 years now - he did not get quality wing chun training. Not at all.

Which is not that surprising, since so much wing chun training is garbage.

BUT WHY SHOULD WE LET HIM HI-JACK THIS THREAD, I ASK YOU?
..........................................

What about Machida and crostraining, guys? :cool:

[Knifefighter]

I've hard harsh back-and-forth words on this forum with Dale Franks (knifefighter) for years now; about wing chun, about catch wrestling, about a bunch of things. But it happens less-and-less now, because I finally caught on to what he's about. He's a mixture of your basic troll and a guy who has accomplished a lot in martial arts, and now that he's in his mid-late 50's, he wants a lot of props coming his way. After all, he does have a huge ego as well, as you guys have probably already surmised.:
LOL... speaking of selective memory. Once again, you prove you are so full of sh!t it's almost too funny. You know I preferred not to make any of this about about me or what I have done. You know that precisely because you were the very one who pushed so hard to find out who I am and then publicized that fact, even though I preferred to just debate the points and remain anonymous...

And you wonder why so many people doubt your credibility. This would be one of the many, many reasons.

[Knifefighter]

He did spend 4-5 years way back in the day studying wing chun with somebody, so he knows something of what he speaks; and unfortunately, from what I've gathered after reading so many of his posts for about 5-6 years now - he did not get quality wing chun training. Not at all.:
What makes this hilarious, is the fact that it is coming from a guy who represents himself as a grappling instructor, yet his grappling instruction consisted of watching grappling tapes.

Again, just another reason so many people know you have no credibility.

[goju]

What makes this hilarious, is the fact that it is coming from a guy who represents himself as a grappling instructor, yet his grappling instruction consisted of watching grappling tapes.

Again, just another reason so many people know you have no credibility.
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn again says the guy no one has any who idea about if you were so great people would no who you are end of story :0

[goju]

goju, pacman, and my friend from Singapore (whose remarks I appreciate):


I've hard harsh back-and-forth words on this forum with Dale Franks (knifefighter) for years now; about wing chun, about catch wrestling, about a bunch of things. But it happens less-and-less now, because I finally caught on to what he's about. He's a mixture of your basic troll and a guy who has accomplished a lot in martial arts, and now that he's in his mid-late 50's, he wants a lot of props coming his way. After all, he does have a huge ego as well, as you guys have probably already surmised.

Now just how good is he? Well he is a BJJ blackbelt who studied under Royce Gracie, so he's a very good grappler. (I saw some of his vids that were posted some years ago of one of his mma matches - which he won with an armlock).

And he's skilled in standup striking and kicking, and clinch work. How good was the striking and kicking that I saw? It looked okay, but not as good as his grappling. And his Dog Brothers stick fighting which I saw some vid(s) of also looked good. All in all, the guy is an accomplished martial artist, no doubt about it. But he's also a small man physically, which I think contributes to his arrogant attitude (as it seems he's always trying to prove something: very often an indicator of some sort of Napoleanic "superiority-hiding-a-feeling-of-inferiority" complex). And he's also very strong, and in very good physical condition, as I heard from someone who's met him.

BUT HERE'S THE POINT FOR YOU AND ME HERE ON THIS FORUM IN 2009:

What Dale loves to do is hi-jack threads and turn them into some sort of "I know what I'm talking about, I've got the experience and the skills, and if you disagree with me about basically anything I say, then all that means is that you don't know 5hit."

NOW SOMETIMES THIS CAN GET COMPLICATED BECAUSE QUITE OFTEN HIS CRITICISMS OF WING CHUN, AND WING CHUN TRAINING METHODS, ARE TRUE.

He did spend 4-5 years way back in the day studying wing chun with somebody, so he knows something of what he speaks; and unfortunately, from what I've gathered after reading so many of his posts for about 5-6 years now - he did not get quality wing chun training. Not at all.

Which is not that surprising, since so much wing chun training is garbage.

BUT WHY SHOULD WE LET HIM HI-JACK THIS THREAD, I ASK YOU?
..........................................

What about Machida and crostraining, guys? :cool:
this is very well put we should just let him and his lady freind terrence rant on and on about wing chun they clearly like to talk about something they dont understand

[Frost]

first post. how obvious. hello dale or dale's friend.

Umm no I Have filled in my profile now, I have been a visitor here off and on for about 8 years, I have never bothered joining until now.

I don’t know Dale but I have read what he has written over the years and as someone who has moved from the Chinese arts to the more sport orientated arts have found myself agreeing with a lot of it, and I posted because I could not believe someone with no grappling experience was telling a BJJ black belt (and a few others on here with actual competition experience) what does and does not work in grappling.


Hi,

First of all, i would like to point out, with my humble knowledge, that Sifu Victor
Parlati has trained student who has won full contact competitions, and himself
has been personally there to learn from Yip Man's first generation students.

I would like to say that i do not know him personally but i had to get this straight
when i saw this, because of your words.

This may be true but it is also irrelevant. I was not questioning his wing chun knowledge I was pointing out his total lack of real grappling experience. If I came on this forum and started telling everyone that my way was the best way for teaching and fighting with wing chun but then admitted I had not trained with any noted teachers, only learned from DVD’s and only tried out the techniques against my own students I wonder what the boards reaction would be?


as i said for all we know thi isnt even the real dale franks wo ever the hell that is it could judst be some fat teenager who plays with his foam nunchuks in his mothers back yard impersonating a person online this happens all the time

and again so he says wheres the video proof of him fighting? i want to see how good he is because with the way hes conducting himself on here( which pretty much everyone else noted he was acting like a **** as well) i think he should post a video of his fights so we can all see :)

bascially all it boils down to is dale is a bjj black belt woopdeee frickin dooo mate this has nothing to do with wing chun and his rediculous comments prove his understanding of the art is limited at best
as far as my record goes i just turned 20but i am interested in competing in nhb tournamentsive boxed all my life and my specialty is goju ryu karate

Videos of Dale have been up and posted before and people who have been on here for a while saw them, if you missed them that doesn’t mean they do not exist. And it actually boils down to Dale having a competition record in MMA, NHB stick fighting , BJJ, submission grappling and whatever he has said about wing chun, on this particular thread he is discussing the validity of certain submissions, something he is more than qualified to discuss.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Clearly this is either Dale or a friend of his posting. But once again, Billy Robinson was sought out by no less than Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett - both of whom wanted to learn submissions from Billy. And Billy may or may not have taught them the figure four facelock - but this is a submission hold that Billy teaches.

This is not something that was invented by Victor Parlati.

And this is not some "carnival showhold" - as anyone who's ever been caught in it can attest to. And the idea that there is no real setup for it against a skilled, resisting opponent is ludicrous, as there are many setups - including a simple knee strike to the mid section in an mma fight, or a knee to the groin in a streetfight.

Which is one of the biggest reasons why I included the hold in the TOP 30 that I personally favor.

It's a hold that Billy Robinson learned from his catch as catch can wrestling instructor, the legendary Billy Riley, from Wigan, England.

Now if Frost, or Dale, or even Royce Gracie himself have a problem with the hold, I really don't give a rat's A55.

Again, the man who beat 4 Gracie's, ie.- 4 different BJJ blackbelts, Sakuraba, wanted to learn - and did learn - from Billy. What more credibility can one ask of Mr. Robinson?
................................................

Enough with the attempted thread hijacking, whoever you are.

This is about crosstraining and wing chun.

[Pacman]

This is about crosstraining and wing chun.

ok so about crosstraining and WC. i think one of the downsides of catch can wrestling to jujitsu other forms of groundfighting is that it seems (i admit i dont know much about catch can wrestling) that a lot of the moves require your strength to be much greater than your opponents...as opposed to an arm bar where you are using 4 limbs + your body against his one limb

[Ultimatewingchun]

Not true, Pacman. Catch is a very scientific art, and in fact, it shares many similarities to jiu jitsu in that regard. It is true that, like basically all wrestling, one is taught to ride heavy and pin the man down by using body weight - but leverage is the most important ingredient, not physical strength. And when I say "pin" - I don't mean pining the shoulders for a three count.

That was always part of catch historically, along with submissions, but in today's catch world most people are going for submissions, and for crosstraining catch with striking arts...as well as using some jiu jitsu as well.

Here'some vids:

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


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh2vVndc1Ok

[Pacman]

victor, if you fought competent people you would know...jk

very interesting vids. my comment before was based on billy robinson's list of favorite moves including

abdominal stretch
piledriver
ddt
backbreaker
suplex
...

all those moves seem to require a greater strength ratio than JJ moves. but again...im not a catch wrestling expert by any means


Not true, Pacman. Catch is a very scientific art, and in fact, it shares many similarities to jiu jitsu in that regard. It is true that, like basically all wrestling, one is taught to ride heavy and pin the man down by using body weight - but leverage is the most important ingredient, not physical strength. And when I say "pin" - I don't mean pining the shoulders for a three count.

That was always part of catch historically, along with submissions, but in today's catch world most people are going for submissions, and for crosstraining catch with striking arts...as well as using some jiu jitsu as well.

Here'some vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh2vVndc1Ok


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

[Ultimatewingchun]

Those are the moves that Billy Robinson used as a "pro wrestler" - which he did for many years. But they are more "for show" than for anything else.

But on the mats behind closed doors, Billy had the reputation (as did two of his contemporaries, Lou Thesz and Karl Gotch)...as being a true submission expert - which, oddly enough within catch circles: one with those skills was known as a "HOOKER"...:eek:

the original idea behind that name being that they could "hook" you into a number of various submission holds.
.....................................

Btw, Lou Thesz used to talk about the abdominal stretch in REAL, LEGIT catch wrestling as being a hold that can best be gotten when on the ground - ie.- the very same move that Eddie Bravo now calls the "TWISTER" ...which, btw, he submitted Royler Gracie with.

The "Abdominal Stretch/Cobra Twist" - as it was known within pro wrestling circles, was done from a standing position (ie.- not very likely to happen against a skilled, resisting opponent).

[Pacman]

i see. very interesting.

[Frost]

Clearly this is either Dale or a friend of his posting. But once again, Billy Robinson was sought out by no less than Kazushi Sakuraba and Josh Barnett - both of whom wanted to learn submissions from Billy. And Billy may or may not have taught them the figure four facelock - but this is a submission hold that Billy teaches.

This is not something that was invented by Victor Parlati.

And this is not some "carnival showhold" - as anyone who's ever been caught in it can attest to. And the idea that there is no real setup for it against a skilled, resisting opponent is ludicrous, as there are many setups - including a simple knee strike to the mid section in an mma fight, or a knee to the groin in a streetfight.

Which is one of the biggest reasons why I included the hold in the TOP 30 that I personally favor.

It's a hold that Billy Robinson learned from his catch as catch can wrestling instructor, the legendary Billy Riley, from Wigan, England.

Now if Frost, or Dale, or even Royce Gracie himself have a problem with the hold, I really don't give a rat's A55.

Again, the man who beat 4 Gracie's, ie.- 4 different BJJ blackbelts, Sakuraba, wanted to learn - and did learn - from Billy. What more credibility can one ask of Mr. Robinson?
................................................

Enough with the attempted thread hijacking, whoever you are.

This is about crosstraining and wing chun.

But don't you see this is the problem, neither Josh or Sakuraba have ever used this hold in any of their fights, and i can't remember anyone using it in any comps i have been to or seen videos of, doesn't this tell you something abotu the effectiveness of the move?

And i am sure Billy Robinson is a great coach, but what fighter has he produced?You say Sak and Jons Barnett went to learn from hims, but so did takada and Anjoh, both fights tapped by Rickson so what does that prove?

[Pacman]

But don't you see this is the problem, neither Josh or Sakuraba have ever used this hold in any of their fights, and i can't remember anyone using it in any comps i have been to or seen videos of, doesn't this tell you something abotu the effectiveness of the move?

And i am sure Billy Robinson is a great coach, but what fighter has he produced?You say Sak and Jons Barnett went to learn from hims, but so did takada and Anjoh, both fights tapped by Rickson so what does that prove?

in all fairness there could be many reasons why they didnt use the moves

1. they trained in BJJ for so long its in their DNA. they fight with BJJ without even having to think. its difficult to incorporate new moves
2. robinson is poor at teaching.
3. the students were poor learners
...

the list goes on. using the "i dont see it by fighters on tv therefore its useless" logic is flawed

[Frost]

ok so about crosstraining and WC. i think one of the downsides of catch can wrestling to jujitsu other forms of groundfighting is that it seems (i admit i dont know much about catch can wrestling) that a lot of the moves require your strength to be much greater than your opponents...as opposed to an arm bar where you are using 4 limbs + your body against his one limb

This is a valid point. From the rolling I have done with guys in the UK who claim a catch background they seem to be very physical, aggressive and quick. This is probably due to a number of factors: working no gi tends to make a match faster, preferring the top position over the guard (when you can rest and catch your breath in BJJ) tends to mean you have to work harder to stay on top. And a lot of the submissions they favour seem to be pain compliance holds where strength plays a part, they seem to love can openers which can be a pain in the neck literally.

Personally I don't think this is a down side; having good take downs and an aggressive top game is great, what is a downside especially from a self-defence point of view is the lack of a guard game.

[Frost]

in all fairness there could be many reasons why they didnt use the moves

1. they trained in BJJ for so long its in their DNA. they fight with BJJ without even having to think. its difficult to incorporate new moves
2. robinson is poor at teaching.
3. the students were poor learners
...

the list goes on. using the "i dont see it by fighters on tv therefore its useless" logic is flawed


But I am not just saying that these two fighters don't use the technique, I am saying I have never seen anyone use it nor seen any evidence of it being pulled off in a competition anywhere. Doesn't that hint that maybe it is not a good go to move?

Its not difficult to incorporate new moves, if your job is to win fights and you see a new move that will help you do that you will learn it, just like the Darce choke became popular. All competitors look for an edge and a submission that works really well that people have not seen before and thus don't know how to defend is what everyone wants.

Also, for Victor, I believe Royler tapped to a triangle from the guard, but I could be wrong.

[Pacman]

perhaps these catch can moves arent as easily integrated into the bjj style as the darce choke.

you're right, the fact that we dont see it could suggest...but its not very solid.

after all, if it were not for royce gracie you might not have seen bjj in MMA for many years or ever. if some really fighter from a different style started winning lots of matches, you would probably lots of training centers specializing in his style sprouting up

there are many factors for what you see and what you don't see in comptetitive sport fighting other than something being useful or not.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Present day catch guys interested in mma comps - or any grappling comps that don't have shoulder pins - are now learning some guard game. Keep in mind that historically, since you could win catch matches back in the day with pinfalls, using a big guard game made no sense, because you could lose the match via a three second shoulder pin.

So knowing how to use guard is important, imo. That said, the contemporary catch attitude about guard is that you mainly use it to try and momentarily neutralize your opponent's attack, and then start working escape routes - and if a submission is there for the taking as you're working your escapes, then surely you go for it.
.....................................

And yes, it was the "twister" that Bravo used to submit Royler.

[Knifefighter]

And this is not some "carnival showhold" - as anyone who's ever been caught in it can attest to. And the idea that there is no real setup for it against a skilled, resisting opponent is ludicrous, as there are many setups - including a simple knee strike to the mid section in an mma fight, or a knee to the groin in a streetfight..[/B]

The fact that you think people bend over when you knee them in the stomach or strike them in the groin shows how little actual experience you have.

[Frost]

perhaps these catch can moves arent as easily integrated into the bjj style as the darce choke.

you're right, the fact that we dont see it could suggest...but its not very solid.

after all, if it were not for royce gracie you might not have seen bjj in MMA for many years or ever. if some really fighter from a different style started winning lots of matches, you would probably lots of training centers specializing in his style sprouting up

there are many factors for what you see and what you don't see in comptetitive sport fighting other than something being useful or not.


But Barnett claims his stuff is 100% catch so it should be easy for him to pick up. Likewise most of the Japanese fighters claim a catch wrestling background not BJJ, and if they can’t pull off this move then perhaps that is a good indication that its not a very good move.

there are many factors for what you see and what you don't see in comptetitive sport fighting other than something being useful or not.[/QUOTE]

Umm no not really the major reason you see something in competitive sports is precisely because its effective. Hence wrestler like Matt Hughes started to learn BJJ moves like the arm bar and the RNC, and BJJ guys started to learn proper double leg take downs, its because these moves work that you see them.

If someone did come along with a new move and starts winning lots of matches with it (like they did with the Darce, the anaconda etc) it is adopted regardless of where it comes from.

But dispite all the catch instructionals out there and the numerous guys that must have watched this stuff and tried this move out in class and on there friends no one has popped up winning matches with it, that’s got to be a pretty solid reason for saying the moves is at best low percentage surly?


Oh and just checked again royler tapped to a triangle from eddies guard, plain old BJJ.

[Knifefighter]

And yes, it was the "twister" that Bravo used to submit Royler.

Bwhahahaaaa! You once again show your complete ignorance of anything grappling. Eddie submittend Royler with a TRIANGLE, NOT A TWISTER.

As far as the twister is concerned, it is a move learned by almost every high school wrestler. We called it the guillotine when I learned it back in H.S. wrestling. Eddie started using it in BJJ and Rigan called it the twister, since there already was a move called the guillotine in BJJ and it looked like your opponent was all twisted up.

[monji112000]

Not true, Pacman. Catch is a very scientific art, and in fact, it shares many similarities to jiu jitsu in that regard. It is true that, like basically all wrestling, one is taught to ride heavy and pin the man down by using body weight - but leverage is the most important ingredient, not physical strength. And when I say "pin" - I don't mean pining the shoulders for a three count.

That was always part of catch historically, along with submissions, but in today's catch world most people are going for submissions, and for crosstraining catch with striking arts...as well as using some jiu jitsu as well.

Here'some vids:

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


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh2vVndc1Ok

Catch is a TOP GAME style. Allot of people see BJJ as a bottom game style (it isn't infact everything you do in catch is adapted to BJJ but not the other way around)


Those are the moves that Billy Robinson used as a "pro wrestler" - which he did for many years. But they are more "for show" than for anything else.

But on the mats behind closed doors, Billy had the reputation (as did two of his contemporaries, Lou Thesz and Karl Gotch)...as being a true submission expert - which, oddly enough within catch circles: one with those skills was known as a "HOOKER"...:eek:

the original idea behind that name being that they could "hook" you into a number of various submission holds.
.....................................

Btw, Lou Thesz used to talk about the abdominal stretch in REAL, LEGIT catch wrestling as being a hold that can best be gotten when on the ground - ie.- the very same move that Eddie Bravo now calls the "TWISTER" ...which, btw, he submitted Royler Gracie with.

The "Abdominal Stretch/Cobra Twist" - as it was known within pro wrestling circles, was done from a standing position (ie.- not very likely to happen against a skilled, resisting opponent).

These are two different submissions. The twister is a Neck crank. The twister has its name from how people look, Eddie claims he didn't call it that. He also claims that he learned it from high school wrestling.. which could be true. The also possible place he learned it was from his BJJ teacher JJ machado.. who also does that submission, and is known for it and similar submissions by his students. The difference is JJ never did the lockdown...

The fact is that BJJ for most people is still evolving, and includes any workable catch techniques. Is Catch evolving??

If your going to add something to your Wing Chun game, don't add a Top Game style, its not practical. JMO (hey What do I know I don't have 5,000 MMA fights or 10,000 wrestling matches.)

[Ultimatewingchun]

The fact that you think people bend over when you knee them in the stomach or strike them in the groin shows how little actual experience you have.


***PURE NONSENSE not even worthy of a response.

[taojkd]

Catch is a TOP GAME style. Allot of people see BJJ as a bottom game style (it isn't infact everything you do in catch is adapted to BJJ but not the other way around)

Um. No. BJJ is not a bottom game. It is a game of position no matter where you are.

a.) Establish position
b.) Establish hand control
c.) Work your game (i.e. Submission, or striking)

Everyone and their uncle comes up with new ways to submit people, but its crap if you cant establish and control the basic positions (side control-1,2,3, half guard, butterfly, knee-on-belly, north-south etc).



***PURE NONSENSE not even worthy of a response.

Just to clarify, which do u think is pure nonsense victor? Bending over to when you knee someone or KF's insinuation that you dont have a lot of experience?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Did someone mention high school wrestling? Okay, now here's what I recommend for those who are sincerely interested in the topic of catch wrestling. There's a documentary that was released 5 years ago about Lancashire catch as catch can wrestling, ie.- Billy Riley's school known as the "snake pit" in Wigan, England.

It's called: "CATCH, THE HOLD NOT TAKEN" (subtitled, "Wrestling hasn't always been a show").

In one part of the doc Dan Gable is interviewed, wherein he acknowledged that high school, college, and amateur wrestling, ie.- what he excelled at all those years, is the result of original catch as catch can wrestling. Let's put this another way: amateur free style wrestling is catch, but without the submissions, and with the emphasis on pinfalls.

Which of course means that plenty of submissions (hooks) were always just below the surface within amateur wrestling - so no one should be surprised that certain moves (ie.- the abdominal stretch) may have been taught within certain high school or college programs.

[Knifefighter]

In one part of the doc Dan Gable is interviewed, wherein he acknowledged that high school, college, and amateur wrestling, ie.- what he excelled at all those years, is the result of original catch as catch can wrestling. Let's put this another way: amateur free style wrestling is catch, but without the submissions, and with the emphasis on pinfalls.

Exactly... and then they evolved in two completely separate directions. Freestyle, folkstyle, and Greco evolved as competitive, athletic endeavors, while Catch evolved mostly into showmanship and worked matches.

[Knifefighter]

***PURE NONSENSE not even worthy of a response.

OK, let's say it is pure nonsense. Tell me how you use the knee and/or groin strikes when you use this to set up the Mr. Grommit Move. What do you do and how does your opponent respond?

[goju]

The fact that you think people bend over when you knee them in the stomach or strike them in the groin shows how little actual experience you have.
um they do bend overunless you knee or kick like a weakling

[monji112000]

Um. No. BJJ is not a bottom game. It is a game of position no matter where you are.

Well UM no. Many people in BJJ feel comfortable on the bottom, thats why allot of people THINK BJJ is a bottom game system. its not , I don't think it is, I never said I did. It encompasses all areas. Catch is fine, greco is amazing, Judo is wonderful ect.. but they all stay still and never evolve. This is because they are set based on the scoring and rules of their respective games. Or lack of a game in the case of Catch.

Many MANY people focus heavily on bottom game tactics. I'm not saying this is bad or good.. its just a fact. Catch has very if anything to offer from the bottom. So thats why so many people from that side of the fence train and are ranked in BJJ.
Erik Paulson is a wonderful example, and someone I personally look up to.

[Pacman]

Umm no not really the major reason you see something in competitive sports is precisely because its effective. Hence wrestler like Matt Hughes started to learn BJJ moves like the arm bar and the RNC, and BJJ guys started to learn proper double leg take downs, its because these moves work that you see them.

actually the reason you see this stuff in MMA is also because there are already long established histories and availabilities of trainers of each individual sport (bjj, boxing, MT, etc).

and the reason for the established history is that each art was turned into a sport, long before mma came along.

there are very few WC teachers, if any, who train students as competitively and as intensely for sport fighting

its not always the art that is lacking as much as the availability and quality of teachers in that art that determine its popularity in sport fighting

[taojkd]

but they all stay still and never evolve. This is because they are set based on the scoring and rules of their respective games. Or lack of a game in the case of Catch.

No. Actually BJJ is continuously evolving because of the sport and the competitions. People are putting on new DVD's with new submissions and specializing on techniques from new positions (rubber guard, de la riva guard, 50/50 guard) all the time. Some work better with GI, some work better with No-Gi some work better in MMA, but to say that they stay still and never evolve? Completely inaccurate. Its not like the competitions for grappling are all the same. The rules do tend to differ from state to state and from competition to competition.

[monji112000]

No. Actually BJJ is continuously evolving because of the sport and the competitions. People are putting on new DVD's with new submissions and specializing on techniques from new positions (rubber guard, de la riva guard, 50/50 guard) all the time. Some work better with GI, some work better with No-Gi some work better in MMA, but to say that they stay still and never evolve? Completely inaccurate. Its not like the competitions for grappling are all the same. The rules do tend to differ from state to state and from competition to competition.

sorry I didn't list BJJ as one of those for a reason. my post seemed vague in that respect. I believe that because of BJJ and submission wrestling's rules many styles can compete and allows for them to evolve. The specific games and styles I mentioned can all be incorporated and are . Thats why I said they don't evolve, they stay relatively still.. catch is catch, greco is greco, ect..

BJJ is constantly changing, and so is submission wrestling. So that clearly states my opinion.;)

Even as things change they don't change that much... its all small details most of the time or ideas from a unfamiliar perspective. Rarely do you see something from mars.

[goju]

you know the arm bar isnt purely a bjj move they have it in most graplling styles they even have it in karate and kung fu
who says judo has to evolve some arts are fine the way they are and dont need improving

[Knifefighter]

there are very few WC teachers, if any, who train students as competitively and as intensely for sport fighting

its not always the art that is lacking as much as the availability and quality of teachers in that art that determine its popularity in sport fighting

If there are a lack of quality teachers and most people don't train with intensity, that speaks volumes about what is lacking in the art.

[Pacman]

If there are a lack of quality teachers and most people don't train with intensity, that speaks volumes about what is lacking in the art.

yes in general the training and teaching is lacking. just look at niehoff's ignorance despite it being his "main art". this is largely in due to the fact that it is recreational for most.

but the techniques themselves are not lacking. they are independent of the teachers who carry them out. there is a difference.

[goju]

If there are a lack of quality teachers and most people don't train with intensity, that speaks volumes about what is lacking in the art.
news flash genius the majority of martial art styles dont have quality teachers that train their students with intensity
good lord thats a no brainer

[Ultimatewingchun]

One example, a double neck-tie with a knee to the mid section or groin, and he will double over somewhat if you connect with the knee with any power - at which point the figure four facelock is there for the taking.

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

And and as far as catch goes, and your latest idea that "pro" wrestling is all there is to catch all these years - while amateur wrestling has gone a different and better route - you either really do have memory loss issues or, what a shock - you're trolling again.

You don't recall a post I made some time ago quoting Gene Lebell's book, "TOUGHEST MAN ALIVE"....one part of which recalls a match in a gym that Gene witnessed wherein LOU THESZ submitted a state and national heavyweight wrestling champion in about 15 seconds?

[goju]

look at that ufc fight with david the crow louiseua(sorry i dont know how to spell his name lol) he spin back kicked his opponent and doubled him over making him bend forward
if you have power in your strikes a attack to the stomach will make someone double over

[Frost]

actually the reason you see this stuff in MMA is also because there are already long established histories and availabilities of trainers of each individual sport (bjj, boxing, MT, etc).

and the reason for the established history is that each art was turned into a sport, long before mma came along.

there are very few WC teachers, if any, who train students as competitively and as intensely for sport fighting

its not always the art that is lacking as much as the availability and quality of teachers in that art that determine its popularity in sport fighting

Before BJJ became popular thanks to the UFC no one knew much about it outside of brazil or the Gracie academy, so it did not have a long established history or very many teachers out there so how did it become so popular where other arts such as catch fighting did not?

Also surely wing chun has enough quality teachers out here that producing a few dozen good students winning in competitions should not be that hard? After all isn't it the single most popular form of Chinese fighting art in the world, with thousands of schools across the planet.

I understand that not every student wants to train as hard or intensely as an MMA fighter, but if we are honest most MMA and grappling have a number of students that don't compete or train that intensely either, and yet the majority of them could probably still hold their own in an amateur competition, so is it really the lack of good teachers or diligent students that is the problem? Or something more fundamental?

[Pacman]

Before BJJ became popular thanks to the UFC no one knew much about it outside of brazil or the Gracie academy, so it did not have a long established history or very many teachers out there so how did it become so popular where other arts such as catch fighting did not?

you just answered your own question. it became popular due to gracie winning so many matches

w/o gracie winning all those matches, we probably wouldn't have the BJJ popularity that we do today in the UFC or in general. then id be having the discussion with you where you would say BJJ is not effective because we don't see it in the UFC

in other words, just because something is not used in the UFC is not absolute validation of its lack of efficacy



I understand that not every student wants to train as hard or intensely as an MMA fighter, but if we are honest most MMA and grappling have a number of students that don't compete or train that intensely either, and yet the majority of them could probably still hold their own in an amateur competition, so is it really the lack of good teachers or diligent students that is the problem? Or something more fundamental?

it is something fundamental. for many reasons (Qing dynasty banning CMA, Communists banning CMA, etc.) Chinese Kung Fu has gone away from a means of fighting to a recreational past time or fitness program.

It is rare to find a hardcore teacher. Even in China. Very rare. On top of that if someone wants to be competitive in MMA, is he going to seek out a rare WC guy to teach him or is he going to go to his local MMA gym that is on every corner.

someone else brought up a good point. everyone poo poo'd karate for a long time but then now you have machida.

[sanjuro_ronin]

No one poo poo'ed Karate, people crapped on non-contact point fighting karate, no one crapped on full contact karate.
No one craps on full contact WC like Alan Orr's guys for example, for the same reason.

[Frost]

you just answered your own question. it became popular due to gracie winning so many matches

w/o gracie winning all those matches, we probably wouldn't have the BJJ popularity that we do today in the UFC or in general. then id be having the discussion with you where you would say BJJ is not effective because we don't see it in the UFC

in other words, just because something is not used in the UFC is not absolute validation of its lack of efficacy.


So what is validation or repudiation of a style or techniques efficiency? If you can’t find any examples anywhere of the style or the technique working against a non compliant partner, why should we believe it works?


someone else brought up a good point. everyone poo poo'd karate for a long time but then now you have machida.


One person being successful does not valid an entire system or way of training, its like saying catch is a great grappling system because Sak beat four gracies whilst conveniently forgetting the numerous other catch trained fighters that got there backsides handed to them by the Gracie’s.

IF only 1 or 2 people can be used to show a system works, then perhaps those people became good in spite of the system and not because of it.

And the Brazilian karate guys are well known for sparring full contact and competing heavily in these events, hardly what your average karate studio does in the West.

[Ultimatewingchun]

...and starting with some very knowledgeable remarks made by Dale and Paul from a different thread, and some followup remarks I made there:


FROM DALE FRANKS/KNIFEFIGHTER:

"People generally move to grappling for one of two reasons:

- They don't know how to strike and/or are getting beaten in the striking exchange and move to grappling in hopes of stopping that.

- Grappling is their preferred method of fighting and/or a tactical opportunity to grapple comes along.”
.................................................. .........


FROM PAUL/SANJURO RONIN:

“Unless you (or your opponent) can incapacitate with minimal strikes, any fight will follow the 'typical' pattern of:

Strike - Clinch- throw/trip/fall- ground fighting.”
.................................................. ..........


***THESE TWO POSTS ARE RIGHT ON THE MARK.

Now when we consider the wing chun "short range power" and the wing chun uses "quick, multiple blast punches" ideas, if you will, IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE QUOTES, then these two wing chun ideas need to be re-examined. In a real encounter, or a match of some sort wherein full (or close to full) power punches and strikes are being used - and clinch and ground are also part of the mix, and the adrenalin is going...

just how important is it to learn grappling/wrestling? As a wing chun fighter? To crosstrain?

Because as Paul said, unless you can incapacitate with minimal strikes, the odds are that most fights/matches are probably going to some sort of clinch/ground.
………………………………………………

AND NOW BACK TO WHERE WE ACTUALLY BEGAN THIS THREAD:

Here's what I see from 1:09-1:27 on this vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM57M8LBJqg

I see two guys throwing punches (and blocks, slips, parries, etc.) along 2 centerlines - and quite often doing the defense and offense almost simultaneously...and those 2 centerlines are actually their shoulder lines (running down their bodies vertically)....while they both, all the while, protected their main centerline...

and doing all of this while using longer range boxing-type punches and footwork - longer and more mobile than what is "conventionally" done within a strict wing chun framework.

Only once during that entire exchange did someone throw a punch that was aimed at a different line other than at a target located somewhere along the opponent's shoulder line that was parallel to the hand they were punching with.

In other words, fighter A was almost always using his left hand to attack and defend on the line normally used and occupied by fighter B's right hand, and he used his right hand to fight against the line normally occupied and used by fighter B's left hand.

And fighter B was doing the same thing.

Not chasing hands, but chasing valuable real estate. By doing this, they maximize their chances that they either safely bridge or they safely hit a target.

Think of it as two sets of dueling arms on two different centerlines.

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

So what I'm getting at now is that what these guys were doing (and some of the longer range kicking that was featured earlier than 1:09 in that vid as well) amounts to a good model for a wing chun fighter to use at the start of an encounter, presumably from long range (although surely not the only model that can work)...

but damage has to be done with the minimal amount of strikes/kicks, as Paul put it, because if not, then clinch/ground will surely come into play more often than not (as well as quite possibly some striking from clinch and ground).

SO WHAT IN WING CHUN WILL WORK? Whether it's at the start of the engagement, presumably from longer range, to the short range striking (which is also borderline clinch area). What will work?

Here's what I believe can work against a skilled, resisting opponent who has striking, kicking, clinch, and ground skills - wherein everything is in play in this encounter.

You can use some pak (and occasionally bong) against straight punches, some low heel kicks to his legs, some garn sao against low punches, some jut, huen, lan sao, and possibly po pai as control mechanisms once you're closely engaged (in a bridge) but not quite in clinch mode; of course some wing chun vertical fist punches while controlling and guarding the center, some elbows that may come from bil jee, some bil/lop sao as defense against his round (and hook) punches...and some beat-and-a-half (nearly simultaneous) pak da - mostly, but not always, from close range; and some lop da from close range.

But the keyword here is SOME.

Because this fight/match could go to full clinch, or takedown/ground mode in a heartbeat.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Fact is, if ONE of the fighter wants to take it to a clinch or to the ground it is almost inevitable that it is going there, simply because it is easier to clinch and grapple than to strike, unless both parties "agree" to keep it striking.

The key issue seems to be footwork, of the striker wants to keep it standing, he/she needs to angle his footwork to the outside where he can deliver strikes from a position where the "target" can't defend properly AND can't close the distance to clinch and grapple.
Easier said than done.

[Ultimatewingchun]

More excellent points, Paul. And needless to say, if we're talking street encounter wherein there may not be that much room to maneuver, then the odds of going to clinch are even higher, whether the striker type wants to or not.

[Wayfaring]

I think if a person trains to be able to grip fight and avoid takedowns they can keep things standing and striking depending on the variance in skills. But the problem most run into is to do this requires grappling skills. The problem with "anti-grappling" skills typically found in WC isn't the techniques themselves, but the fact that they aren't trained against quality grappling opponents.

I see fighters all the time whose overall grappling game isn't as high as some others, but with their fighter based conditioning and the fact they compete and train against good grapplers keeping their defense good they do very well.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Although he posted this on another thread, this quote from Paul belongs here also, since it's so pertinent:

"If you 'live' in a phone booth like WC fighters are trained to do, clinch grappling, at the very least, is a must to know.

Lets be honest here, if you like to be on the inside where an opponent can grab you with BOTH hands, the chances of grappling are close to 100% and the chances of going to the ground almost as much."

[sanjuro_ronin]

There is only one type of "anti-grappling" and that is KO'ing the fighter before he gets a hand on you, anything else is grappling.
Unless you are the type of fighter than can deliver incapacitating strikes ( every one of them) from a place where your opponent can't "reach" you, then learning to grapple and clinch is probably a really good idea.
Unless of course you think you can chain punch someone that outweights you by 100 lbs and knows how to fight, into submission, then you're fine.
:p

[t_niehoff]

Although he posted this on another thread, this quote from Paul belongs here also, since it's so pertinent:

"If you 'live' in a phone booth like WC fighters are trained to do, clinch grappling, at the very least, is a must to know.

Lets be honest here, if you like to be on the inside where an opponent can grab you with BOTH hands, the chances of grappling are close to 100% and the chances of going to the ground almost as much."

Yet MT fighters and some MMA fighters do fight on the inside, fight to control the opponent while striking him, and are able to deal with grappling/takedowns.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yeah, so?

What's your point?

You who tell us that wing chun is your primary art!

What is it?

[goju]

lol this is some goofy ****

[t_niehoff]

Yeah, so?

What's your point?

You who tell us that wing chun is your primary art!

What is it?
'
The point is that you can get close (the phonebooth) and fight on the inside by controlling your opponent while striking him -- and not get taken down or go into pure grappling. MT and MMA fighters do it all the time.

And that is WCK's approach to fighitng: to control the opponent while striking.

[t_niehoff]

lol this is some goofy ****

Methinks YOU are the goofysh1t.

[sanjuro_ronin]

'
The point is that you can get close (the phonebooth) and fight on the inside by controlling your opponent while striking him -- and not get taken down or go into pure grappling. MT and MMA fighters do it all the time.

And that is WCK's approach to fighitng: to control the opponent while striking.

Nobody said you can't do it, you just have to modify it bigtime, just like the MT clinch needs to be modified to work in a MMA environment.

[t_niehoff]

Nobody said you can't do it, you just have to modify it bigtime, just like the MT clinch needs to be modified to work in a MMA environment.

I know from disucssions with you that YOU understand.

Anything we do -- anything -- has to be "modified", we have to find our own way of doing it, making it work, etc. And there is a process for doing just that. I know that YOU know what it is.

[goju]

lol the more this guy talks the less he makes sense i think he confuses himself sometimes

[Knifefighter]

lol the more this guy talks the less he makes sense i think he confuses himself sometimes


The only guys that are confused are the theoretical, pretend, non-fighters.

[Pacman]

The only guys that are confused are the theoretical, pretend, non-fighters.

sh!t. great counterpoint. awesome critical thinking. way to discuss the issues.

apparently we have two people here that suffer from aspergers

[Yoshiyahu]

I know from disucssions with you that YOU understand.

Anything we do -- anything -- has to be "modified", we have to find our own way of doing it, making it work, etc. And there is a process for doing just that. I know that YOU know what it is.

Thats right depending on the situtation you have to modify your technique. It foolish to think that ever Tan Sau will be done exactly as it is done in the form. The Techniques have to be altered to fit the situtation.