The response to the T bull---- thread [Archive]

Ultimatewingchun

07-31-2009, 06:56 PM

I'm sorry, Pacman, but this post of yours is sooooo to the point that I just had to steal it and make a thread out of it. You cover basically the whole gamut here with this:
......................................

"Terence,

if you have read my posts you would see that i do agree with you on certain things.

as i have said many times, the majority of how WC and TCMA is taught is BS. bottom line they do not learn to apply the techniques through fighting. they teach sticky hands first and SLT...and then just do that for 10 years and then expect to know how to fight.

or, they fight with pure aggression and no skill and just front kick chain punch

so we really do not differ too much on the training aspect except that i believe you need to do other things than just start fighting (certain drills etc that you hate)

i do not disagree that we need to train functionally, i disagree with your assertion that all TCMA training is not functional. training is determined by each individual sifu and over the years TCMA training in general has been watered down across the board.

when you say things like this to me, 'Is simultaneous blocking and striking high percentage? If you haven't gone and sparred with good boxers you can't know'...is when you really look like a pompous fool.

not only do you not know what i have or can do, you are automatically inferring that you have it all figured out. this is why people think that you think you are the supreme fighter. do you really wonder why we are calling for evidence of your superior fighting knowledge?"
..................................................

***ANYBODY WANT TO COMMENT UPON, OR ADD ANYTHING, TO THIS?

Now you can bet that Terence (and probably Dale) will respond to this thread, but I'm very interested in hearing from the rest of you. What do you think of Pacman's post?

LSWCTN1

08-01-2009, 04:09 PM

dont particularly like T's ramblings, but i have to stick up for him here

he does always say that chi sau etc has its place, but only up to a certain skill level. However, this does sound like he is inferring 'enlightenment' i agree :D

Knifefighter

08-01-2009, 04:20 PM

not only do you not know what i have or can do, you are automatically inferring that you have it all figured out. this is why people think that you think you are the supreme fighter. do you really wonder why we are calling for evidence of your superior fighting knowledge?"
..................................................

***ANYBODY WANT TO COMMENT UPON, OR ADD ANYTHING, TO THIS?

Now you can bet that Terence (and probably Dale) will respond to this thread, but I'm very interested in hearing from the rest of you. What do you think of Pacman's post?

Terence's response was perfect. Show the evidence of ANYONE doing it the way you are saying it should be done.

What's funny to me is that the only evidence you can supply is that of what most of you guys call "sloppy" WC.

There doesn't seem to be any "real" WC being done except by each of you in the confines of your private studios where there is never any video equipment around.

And you want to know the funniest part... I'm about the only one who gives props to the WC guys who are really out there mixing it up. Most of the WC guys say "Oh they are doing it sloppy Caveman style", when the fact is, that's the way it is going to look when you try to stick to the WC "principles".

Think we are wrong and want to shut us up? Show us the evidence of someone doing it differently.

Ultimatewingchun

08-01-2009, 05:41 PM

Not true at all. I've said a bunch of good things about Alan Orr's student, Aaron Baum, on a recent thread; and of course, I've always given props to Rick Spain. And to Keith Mazza'a students whose competition vids where posted by Phil Redmond.

Pacman

08-02-2009, 07:20 AM

Terence's response was perfect. Show the evidence of ANYONE doing it the way you are saying it should be done.

What's funny to me is that the only evidence you can supply is that of what most of you guys call "sloppy" WC.

There doesn't seem to be any "real" WC being done except by each of you in the confines of your private studios where there is never any video equipment around.

And you want to know the funniest part... I'm about the only one who gives props to the WC guys who are really out there mixing it up. Most of the WC guys say "Oh they are doing it sloppy Caveman style", when the fact is, that's the way it is going to look when you try to stick to the WC "principles".

Think we are wrong and want to shut us up? Show us the evidence of someone doing it differently.

why would we supply evidence of what we think should be done and then call it sloppy and "caveman" like?

what you said makes no sense.

but regarding "sloppy" and "caveman" fighting and how you like it, you are probably referring to the comments regarding this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krg4k8uB4E8

my response to your response is, "well if you have ever fought quality competent fighters you would realize the difference between agression and technique"

since you have it all figured out, please tell me what WC principle those in the video adheres to

Knifefighter

08-02-2009, 08:04 AM

why would we supply evidence of what we think should be done and then call it sloppy and "caveman" like?
You aren't supplying any evidence. That's the point. The only evidence of WC being used against resisting opponents seems to be what you call caveman style.

but regarding "sloppy" and "caveman" fighting and how you like it, you are probably referring to the comments regarding this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krg4k8uB4E8

my response to your response is, "well if you have ever fought quality competent fighters you would realize the difference between agression and technique"

My response was, show me the evidence of you doing it better... and since you obviously can't do that (which tells me exactly where your skills lie), show me the evidence of SOMEONE doing it better.

since you have it all figured out, please tell me what WC principle those in the video adheres to
The principle of "that is what it is going to look like when the majority of WC people try to put their training into practice in a full-contact setting."

Pacman

08-02-2009, 08:44 AM

You aren't supplying any evidence. That's the point. The only evidence of WC being used against resisting opponents seems to be what you call caveman style.

well its not my fault that there arent many WC sparring vids out on youtube. youtube isn't the end all be all of knowledge.

My response was, show me the evidence of you doing it better... and since you obviously can't do that (which tells me exactly where your skills lie), show me the evidence of SOMEONE doing it better.

i will. all you have to do is watch any of your favorite UFC fights. watch machida. watch liddell. watch anderson sylva. there is a difference between a slugfest or brawl and a skilled fight. its fairly obvious

The principle of "that is what it is going to look like when the majority of WC people try to put their training into practice in a full-contact setting."

probably because without proper training you cannot overcome your natural urge to fight like that...it especially comes out in a full contact setting because of your nerves. you abandon all technique and just brawl.

this does happen a lot to people who have not trained, but it is not the desired behavior.

look to any of your prized MMA fighters. they do not brawl.

Knifefighter

08-02-2009, 09:03 AM

well its not my fault that there arent many WC sparring vids out on youtube. youtube isn't the end all be all of knowledge.
If you had access to someone using WC with good technique, it would be very easy for you to make some clips. Somehow, however, I have the feeling you don't have access to anyone who can actually use WC with "technique".

Pacman

08-02-2009, 09:39 AM

If you had access to someone using WC with good technique, it would be very easy for you to make some clips. Somehow, however, I have the feeling you don't have access to anyone who can actually use WC with "technique".

read my posts again. try to comprehend. please. focus like a laser beam.

this is not about WC. its about using some technique to fight versus a blitzkrieg attack. you want evidence of someone using technique to fight? watch lyoto machida fight someone.

Ultimatewingchun

08-02-2009, 10:57 AM

Regardless of Dale/knifefighter's attempts to derail, troll, stall, and change the subject, this thread is about TERENCE, and his constant bul$hit - made doubly necessary by the fact that...

IT IS TERENCE WHO HAS YET TO PROVE THAT HE CAN DO ANYTHING OF WHAT HE CONSTANTLY DROLLS ON ABOUT.

Here's what Terence recently said on another thread:

"I do fight and with skilled people. I think that I'm competently skilled. I'VE DONE THE WORK. What you want is for me to show you my work. Sorry. DO YOUR OWN WORK. It won't help you to see another's work -- you've got to do it yourself."
..................................................

***WELL, quite frankly, Terence, I find that very hard to believe. Because you provide NO evidence that you're competently skilled. Constant talk is not evidence. It's hear-say, and in this case, it's your own hearsay about yourself. :rolleyes: And being a lawyer, you should know (and do know) that you haven't provided any credible evidence whatsoever.

Furthermore, this post of yours quoted above is the same kind of talk you engaged in leading up to the Wing Chun Sparring Get Together in 2003 in Cleveland, wherein you went on for months in post-after-post about how realistic your training was, how good you were getting at it, what great shape you were in, and how we'd all see that once you showed up in Cleveland - AND THEN YOU DIDN'T SHOW.

Anyone could conceivably spend months reading and rereading the words of Matt Thornton (or the posts of Dale Franks, for that matter)...and then decide to regurgitate all of it back on a wing chun forum in a way that is always scewered to say, in effect, "I tried wing chun, it has very little to offer, I NOW know how to get good at fighting, and if you disagree with anything I have to say, it's because you don't know what you're talking about and haven't experienced what I've experienced."

But to date, Terence's refusal to provide any VISUAL evidence whatsoever is a clear indication that he CAN'T back up his constant droll. He says that WCK is his primary art, but yet virtually everything he says suggests otherwise: because according to Terence, basically nothing in WCK actually works.

So I think it is very safe to assume three things about Terence:

1- He never learned that much wing chun to begin with.
2- For all his talk, he still has very little skills in ANY martial art.
3- He wants to think that everyone else in WCK is in the same boat he is.

Phil Redmond

08-02-2009, 01:20 PM

Pacman

08-02-2009, 03:37 PM

No real fight against some skilled will look textbook. I hate it when people who have NEVER competed say where is the WC or where is the Bak Mei or what ever. Even pro fighters fights don't look like choreographed Jet Li movies where everything looks perfect.
But it's always the people who don't fight or never fought that talk trash about fight clips they see. I say they should get there b u t t s in the ring and try to pull off perfect techniques so those of us who have competed can tear their fights apart.

its not even about sloppyness. im not saying that his fook sau wasnt perfect

im saying that each fighter charged at each other with guns blazing. no setups. no feints. no jabs. no footwork.

im sure niehoff would say, "ask any competent functional fighter in MT or boxing. fighting like that is not effective because for every blow you land, you will probably get one back."

Phil Redmond

08-02-2009, 03:43 PM

its not even about sloppyness. im not saying that his fook sau wasnt perfect

im saying that each fighter charged at each other with guns blazing. no setups. no feints. no jabs. no footwork.

im sure niehoff would say, "ask any competent functional fighter in MT or boxing. fighting like that is not effective because for every blow you land, you will probably get one back."
I didn't even look at the clip until you pointed it out to me. I was just speaking about what I see from posters online in general. Regarding WC, you won't see what most people think is WC in full contact events. ;)

Knifefighter

08-02-2009, 06:52 PM

read my posts again. try to comprehend. please. focus like a laser beam.

this is not about WC. its about using some technique to fight versus a blitzkrieg attack. you want evidence of someone using technique to fight? watch lyoto machida fight someone.

Oh, OK. So learning MMA, boxing, MT, etc. enables one to fight with technique while learning WC only enables you to fight caveman style with no technique.

I'm OK with that. I kind of agree with that.

goju

08-02-2009, 07:24 PM

coming froma style where you lay on the guy the whole time and twist his joint until you make him say unlce i hardly see how you have room to talk knifefighter?
but of course you know more than us after all your some guy know one has even heard of lol

Ultimatewingchun

08-02-2009, 09:47 PM

"Oh, OK. So learning MMA, boxing, MT, etc. enables one to fight with technique while learning WC only enables you to fight caveman style with no technique.

I'm OK with that. I kind of agree with that." (Dale Franks/aka, knifefighter)
...........................................

***TOTAL TROLL POST. For you somewhat newbies to this forum, come to expect this kind of arrogant dribble from Dale.

Pacman

08-02-2009, 10:36 PM

Oh, OK. So learning MMA, boxing, MT, etc. enables one to fight with technique while learning WC only enables you to fight caveman style with no technique.

I'm OK with that. I kind of agree with that.

haha sad. you know thats not even close to what i said. your desperate attempt to derail the conversation is a big tell--you want to end this conversation because you realize what you had to say was ridiculous

goju

08-02-2009, 10:37 PM

dale hasnt posted any of his fights either wonder why?

Ultimatewingchun

08-02-2009, 10:44 PM

Yeah, Dale is trying to run interference for Terence.
....................................

Still waiting to hear from the man-of-the-hour about this, though:

"But to date, Terence's refusal to provide any VISUAL evidence whatsoever is a clear indication that he CAN'T back up his constant droll. He says that WCK is his primary art, but yet virtually everything he says suggests otherwise: because according to Terence, basically nothing in WCK actually works.

So I think it is very safe to assume three things about Terence:

1- He never learned that much wing chun to begin with.
2- For all his talk, he still has very little skills in ANY martial art.
3- He wants to think that everyone else in WCK is in the same boat he is.

grasshopper 2.0

08-03-2009, 01:20 AM

LSWCTN1

08-03-2009, 03:13 AM

ok, you want some evidence of decent wing chun being applied in a way that is probably more akin to sport fighting?

have a look on youtube for Cesario Di Domenico of Andreas Hoffman's weng chun. the guy is very good

all arguments ended.

i can hear Terence and Dale now, saying how it is despite wing chun and not because of wing chun...

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 07:22 AM

With regards to wc as caveman fighting - does that also refer to the likes of rick spain? How about Terence?

Terence: in a way, knifefighter is dissing you. Even with all ur hardwork and fighting against competent fighters, he is implying wc won't work...

So let's say we all do suck and terence is the man. Terence, shouldn't u stick up for yourself? For ur style? For wc brothers? Show knifefighter that wck can be respectable!

Dale is absolutely right -- and you should be asking yourself "why is what he is saying the case?" The answer is in two parts: (1) how WCK people are training (to fight), and (2) the other part is in what they are training to do.

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 09:34 AM

ok, you want some evidence of decent wing chun being applied in a way that is probably more akin to sport fighting?

have a look on youtube for Cesario Di Domenico of Andreas Hoffman's weng chun. the guy is very good

all arguments ended.

i can hear Terence and Dale now, saying how it is despite wing chun and not because of wing chun...

For me, the bottom line for anyone is "(1) are they doing in fighting (2) what they train to do (3) as they train to do it?"

Knifefighter

08-03-2009, 09:51 AM

coming froma style where you lay on the guy the whole time and twist his joint until you make him say unlce i hardly see how you have room to talk knifefighter?

Yeah, god forbid, I would train in a system that has thousands of examples of people using it against skilled opponents exactly the way it is trained. It's much better to study a style filled with myths and misconceptions with next to no examples of it working the way it is trained and in which the practitioners can't even agree on what it should look like in application.

Knifefighter

08-03-2009, 10:07 AM

ok, you want some evidence of decent wing chun being applied in a way that is probably more akin to sport fighting?

have a look on youtube for Cesario Di Domenico of Andreas Hoffman's weng chun. the guy is very good

all arguments ended.

I found a couple:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBszw6ic4mk

The fact is, that's exactly how WC will look if you actually start using it against resisting opponents and you start to develop more realistic application and skill.

That's exactly what I've been talking about all along... notice how you don't see simultaneous blocks/strikes, no chi sao looking technique, no tan sao, lop sao and all the other theoretical b.s.

A perfect display of how WC would evolve under actual fighting circumstances.

You are right. All arguments ended.

goju

08-03-2009, 12:46 PM

Yeah, god forbid, I would train in a system that has thousands of examples of people using it against skilled opponents exactly the way it is trained. It's much better to study a style filled with myths and misconceptions with next to no examples of it working the way it is trained and in which the practitioners can't even agree on what it should look like in application.
yeah bjj had its share of mcdojoism
for al its talk its never been tested againsted a master of another style anyone has heard of
all the tma guys the gracies are sparring with in their so called challenge matches no one even knows who they are! lol and being that so many of the gracies are in california a treasure trove of wel known chinese japanese korea and korean masters it makes you wonder why they never challenged a known master

but of course they did once we have the kimura helio gracie fight and we all know how that turned out :)

Knifefighter

08-03-2009, 12:58 PM

yeah bjj had its share of mcdojoism
for al its talk its never been tested againsted a master of another style anyone has heard of
all the tma guys the gracies are sparring with in their so called challenge matches no one even knows who they are! lol and being that so many of the gracies are in california a treasure trove of wel known chinese japanese korea and korean masters it makes you wonder why they never challenged a known master

LOL... you can't fight a TMA "master" when the masters have never fought a day in their lives.

goju

08-03-2009, 01:17 PM

LOL... you can't fight a TMA "master" when the masters have never fought a day in their lives.
oh what a great excuse there dael
is that the same excuse the gracises used when they backed down from the gene lebbel match and the benny the jet one too? lol
how brilliant well of course choking out random guys off the street who are supposed to be practioners of other styles proves how efficent bjj is lol

Ultimatewingchun

08-03-2009, 10:24 PM

“Yeah, it would be nice to see what he (Terence) is doing”…

(Dale Franks/knifefighters') response on another thread to my (Victor’s) talking about vids, and of course this includes my insistence that Terence finally post some vids of his own.

(Dale goes on)… “It's very telling when the guys who post all the demo clips, but no sparring clips.”
.........................................

*** But Dale, I (Victor) posted some sparring vids several years ago – SO WHY DON’T YOU HOLD TERENCE TO THE SAME STANDARD?

You (Dale) keep talking about how wing chun people need to show us how they go about sparring/fighting, whatever - so therefore, what about this remark by Terence recently:

“WCK is my primary art.”
...........................................

***You mean, Dale, that since you constantly demand that people who say this kind of thing show what they can do (because you’ve made it so clear that you think very little wing chun can actually work) - you mean to say that Terence is exempt from this?

Very strange and inconsistent, hummm :rolleyes:
..................................................

THEREFORE, this needs repeating:

Anyone (like Terence) could conceivably spend months reading and rereading the words of Matt Thornton (or the posts of Dale Franks, for that matter) - and then decide to regurgitate all of it back on a wing chun forum in a way that is always scewered to say, in effect, "I tried wing chun, it has very little to offer, I NOW know how to get good at fighting, and if you disagree with anything I have to say, it's because you don't know what you're talking about and haven't experienced what I've experienced."

But to date, Terence's refusal to provide any VISUAL evidence whatsoever is a clear indication that he CAN'T back up his constant droll. He says that WCK is his primary art, but yet virtually everything he says suggests otherwise: because according to Terence, basically nothing in WCK actually works.

So I think it is very safe to assume three things about Terence:

1- He never learned that much wing chun to begin with.
2- For all his talk, he has very little skill in ANY martial art. (Otherwise he'd show it).
3- He wants to think that everyone else in WCK is in the same boat he is.

goju

08-04-2009, 12:00 AM

he fights with other guys with sticks in his mothers back yard he knows what hes talking about lol

LSWCTN1

08-04-2009, 12:54 AM

I found a couple:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBszw6ic4mk

The fact is, that's exactly how WC will look if you actually start using it against resisting opponents and you start to develop more realistic application and skill.

That's exactly what I've been talking about all along... notice how you don't see simultaneous blocks/strikes, no chi sao looking technique, no tan sao, lop sao and all the other theoretical b.s.

A perfect display of how WC would evolve under actual fighting circumstances.

You are right. All arguments ended.

you know what it is with you?

and i completely understand it - it makes perfect sense.

you dont believe something until you see it working. Fair enough

Kev Gledhill makes excellent posts about tan sau lop sau etc and their apparent redundancy in fighting. perhaps someone can link them?

like Victor ays - there is a whole world of bull **** in wck. but thats not all wck has to offer

if you have such a bs radar, then why did you stay in wck for 4-5 years?

also, IMHO opinion its not necessarily a perfect display - it is his interpretation of wck. he doesnt necessarily flank so much, and the only times they are unballanced are when they are knocked over! it is however, a very good example of wck working. oddly enough - even one of the great wck trolls on youtube, opticannon, has only good to say about him

i will have to study the videos again this evening (GMT!) and tell you if i see tan/lop etc. i should well imagine that 2 eyes see 2 very different things

simultaneous blocks/strikes also mean different things to different people. in all your 'real world' or even sport environment experience, have you never thrown a strike that connected and also blocked their strike? is that not simultaneous blocks/strikes? in my book it is. it may not be LSDD but it still is a simultaneous block/strike. even more so than LSDD in the true sense of the phrase

would you care to sure who you studied wck with? it may enlighten a lot of people on this board

Pacman

08-04-2009, 01:45 AM

you know what it is with you?

and i completely understand it - it makes perfect sense.

you dont believe something until you see it working. Fair enough

Kev Gledhill makes excellent posts about tan sau lop sau etc and their apparent redundancy in fighting. perhaps someone can link them?

like Victor ays - there is a whole world of bull **** in wck. but thats not all wck has to offer

if you have such a bs radar, then why did you stay in wck for 4-5 years?

also, IMHO opinion its not necessarily a perfect display - it is his interpretation of wck. he doesnt necessarily flank so much, and the only times they are unballanced are when they are knocked over! it is however, a very good example of wck working. oddly enough - even one of the great wck trolls on youtube, opticannon, has only good to say about him

i will have to study the videos again this evening (GMT!) and tell you if i see tan/lop etc. i should well imagine that 2 eyes see 2 very different things

simultaneous blocks/strikes also mean different things to different people. in all your 'real world' or even sport environment experience, have you never thrown a strike that connected and also blocked their strike? is that not simultaneous blocks/strikes? in my book it is. it may not be LSDD but it still is a simultaneous block/strike. even more so than LSDD in the true sense of the phrase

would you care to sure who you studied wck with? it may enlighten a lot of people on this board

apparently it was robert chu aka chusauli

Ultimatewingchun

08-04-2009, 01:55 AM

No, it wasn't Robert.

Pacman

08-04-2009, 01:56 AM

o my mistake. sorry robert!

CFT

08-04-2009, 02:25 AM

The stand up looked very Muay Thai to me but that is just my inexperienced eye.

simultaneous blocks/strikes also mean different things to different people. in all your 'real world' or even sport environment experience, have you never thrown a strike that connected and also blocked their strike? is that not simultaneous blocks/strikes? in my book it is. it may not be LSDD but it still is a simultaneous block/strike. even more so than LSDD in the true sense of the phraseThat reminds me of something Wan Kam Leung wrote ... to paraphrase ... lin da dai siu is better than lin siu dai da.

Just a different mental focus perhaps but may give you different results.

LSWCTN1

08-04-2009, 03:08 AM

The stand up looked very Muay Thai to me but that is just my inexperienced eye.

That reminds me of something Wan Kam Leung wrote ... to paraphrase ... lin da dai siu is better than lin siu dai da.

Just a different mental focus perhaps but may give you different results.

WSL thinking i guess (not to say its not in different lines, but wasn't a prominent feature of my previous Joseph Cheng lineage)

i guess that LDDS is the appropriate Cantonese term, unfortunately i know very little Cantonese :o

CFT

08-04-2009, 03:26 AM

LSWCTN1

08-04-2009, 04:56 AM

The "siu" in "lin siu dai da" means to dissipate, so in dissipating an attack you carry your own attack (da).

I think (my interpretation) of what Kevin Gledhill posts is that the primary focus is attack - the "siu" (dissipation) comes as a consequence of the attack via the position of the elbows/forearms. This seems more like "lin da dai siu".

as i understand it, KG uses the attack as the defence. and it is as a consequence of the attack that it happens true. but i think i'm right in saying that this is a deliberate consequence

we are taught to punch, for example, the same way in which KG describes. Although i have never been specifically told that the motion in the tan motion, although once it was pointed out is was very clear to me! same idea, just different teaching methods i guess

someone else on this board also pointed out in a pm to me yesterday what the 'spiral energy' Hendrik often talks of is. we do it and again, the only difference was we had never had it described in that way. i guess we had the action, just not the description (simplifying the art even more? Possibly)

my initial point was however, that one wck is 'no wasted movements' why do two movements when one will suffice?

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 06:31 AM

***You mean, Dale, that since you constantly demand that people who say this kind of thing show what they can do (because you’ve made it so clear that you think very little wing chun can actually work) - you mean to say that Terence is exempt from this?

I don't need to see his vids because I know that what he says about training is right. The fact that he doesn't post clips doesn't make him wrong in his views. I know because I have been out there doing the same things he says one should be doing. I see people doing what he is saying can be done all the time.

The reason I need to see clips from you guys is that you are proposing things, that in my experience, rarely happen the the way you guys think they will happen. So, in this case, since I don't have my own evidence that lends support to your views, I need to see SOME evidence from somewhere.

CFT

08-04-2009, 06:39 AM

someone else on this board also pointed out in a pm to me yesterday what the 'spiral energy' Hendrik often talks of is. we do it and again, the only difference was we had never had it described in that way. i guess we had the action, just not the description (simplifying the art even more? Possibly)Can you share that info in another thread?

my initial point was however, that one wck is 'no wasted movements' why do two movements when one will suffice?I agree. Makes me question all the multi-move hand trapping that I see in videos.

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 06:43 AM

Kev Gledhill makes excellent posts about tan sau lop sau etc and their apparent redundancy in fighting. perhaps someone can link them?
There are clips showing him using tan sau lop sau against resisting opponents? Yes please link them, because I'm pretty sure he's a theoretical, non-fighter who would never be able to post a clip of him actually mixing it up for real.

if you have such a bs radar, then why did you stay in wck for 4-5 years?
I trained it with Richard Bustillo, Hawkins Cheung and Dan Inosanto for 6-7 years. I stuck with it so long because I was a clueless kid who had no striking training beforehand and didn't understand the difference between theoretical and real training. Like most of you guys, I wanted to believe it was the "secret" formula.

simultaneous blocks/strikes also mean different things to different people. in all your 'real world' or even sport environment experience, have you never thrown a strike that connected and also blocked their strike? is that not simultaneous blocks/strikes?
Lots of things happen accidentally, but that's a big difference from being able to use them consciously on a planned level.

LSWCTN1

08-04-2009, 07:13 AM

Can you share that info in another thread?

I agree. Makes me question all the multi-move hand trapping that I see in videos.

think about how you throw out your tan or your gaan or punch :D

KG and Hendrik say the same thing almost - its all in the twist!

simple once its explained!

There are clips showing him using tan sau lop sau against resisting opponents? Yes please link them, because I'm pretty sure he's a theoretical, non-fighter who would never be able to post a clip of him actually mixing it up for real.

I trained it with Richard Bustillo, Hawkins Cheung and Dan Inosanto for 6-7 years. I stuck with it so long because I was a clueless kid who had no striking training beforehand and didn't understand the difference between theoretical and real training. Like most of you guys, I wanted to believe it was the "secret" formula.

Lots of things happen accidentally, but that's a big difference from being able to use them consciously on a planned level.

the whole point is that you train it so that it is 'accidental' in so much as not acting consciously on a planned level.

also if you trained bs wck under Hawkins Cheung, and he taught Robert Chu, and he taught Terence is Terence bs because he has a poor skillset, or are you for not making it work? :confused:

(incidentally i dont think HC is bs at all)

also, what do you think of Hubud and its combat application? (i have a little Petikri Tersia experience with a world no 1/2 stickfighter - not much mind you)

also the KG post is about using the action effectively with a fist attached

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 07:17 AM

also, what do you think of Hubud and its combat application? (i have a little Petikri Tersia experience with a world no 1/2 stickfighter - not much mind you)
Same as I think about chi sao.

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 07:20 AM

also if you trained bs wck under Hawkins Cheung, and he taught Robert Chu, and he taught Terence is Terence bs because he has a poor skillset, or are you for not making it work? :confused:
I don't know. But if you want to know if you can make yours work, do what I did. Go out and fight boxers, kickboxers, and MMA fights. That will tell you everything you need to know about making it work for you.

Ultimatewingchun

08-04-2009, 07:47 AM

"I don't need to see his (Terence's) vids because I know that what he says about training is right." (Dale Franks/knifefighter)
..............................

**AND my whole thesis is that...Terence is simply regurgitating your words and those of people like Matt Thornton. My BS detector tells me that he's about 80% talk - and about 20% actual skills. And until he posts some vids that provide evidence otherwise - that's what he is, as far as I'm concerned.

Furthermore, I think this view of Terence is starting to become the consensus around here.

Ultimatewingchun

08-04-2009, 08:02 AM

"The reason I need to see clips from you guys is that you are proposing things, that in my experience, rarely happen the the way you guys think they will happen. So, in this case, since I don't have my own evidence that lends support to your views, I need to see SOME evidence from somewhere." (Dale Franks/knifefighter)
..............................

***OKAY, now that's Dale at his best. In his wing chun experience, certain things some people around here talk about rarely ever happened when he sparred, and he wants to see evidence that these things can actually work against a skilled, resisting opponent - and can work fairly often.

goju

08-04-2009, 08:33 AM

There are clips showing him using tan sau lop sau against resisting opponents? Yes please link them, because I'm pretty sure he's a theoretical, non-fighter who would never be able to post a clip of him actually mixing it up for real.

I trained it with Richard Bustillo, Hawkins Cheung and Dan Inosanto for 6-7 years. I stuck with it so long because I was a clueless kid who had no striking training beforehand and didn't understand the difference between theoretical and real training. Like most of you guys, I wanted to believe it was the "secret" formula.

Lots of things happen accidentally, but that's a big difference from being able to use them consciously on a planned level.

perhaps you were just alousy student and to lazy or incompetant to learn the martial art that was being raught to you people often use that excuse when they are a failure at something lol

CFT

08-04-2009, 08:50 AM

perhaps you were just alousy student and to lazy or incompetant to learn the martial art that was being raught to you people often use that excuse when they are a failure at something lolYou like to write people off with no basis in fact.

The fact that KF is a BJJ BB means that he has aptitude and perseverence in MAs.

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 08:51 AM

goju

08-04-2009, 08:53 AM

You like to write people off with no basis in fact.

The fact that KF is a BJJ BB means that he has aptitude and perseverence in MAs.
a black belt just means you mastered the basics of your style its nothing impressive

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 08:54 AM

perhaps you were just alousy student and to lazy or incompetant to learn the martial art that was being raught to you people often use that excuse when they are a failure at something lol

Yeah, that was it. I was a lousy student and too lazy and incompetent to learn. But somehow I managed to become relatively proficient at boxing, MT, stickfighting, wrestling and BJJ. I wonder how that happened.

goju

08-04-2009, 08:58 AM

Yeah, that was it. I was a lousy student and too lazy and incompetent to learn. But somehow I managed to become relatively proficient at boxing, MT, stickfighting, wrestling and BJJ. I wonder how that happened.
or so you claim^
hoonestly you response as to why you left wing chun its the same response every person who fails at something give
basically to sum it up you just said"it was stupid"lol
perhaps the problem is you not the art

t_niehoff

08-04-2009, 09:05 AM

I don't know. But if you want to know if you can make yours work, do what I did. Go out and fight boxers, kickboxers, and MMA fights. That will tell you everything you need to know about making it work for you.

This is the crux of the matter.

Go out and fight with proven, competent fighters and you'll see. If you don't do that, you'll never develop good skill and you'll never see. (Skill and understanding go hand-in-hand).

t_niehoff

08-04-2009, 09:31 AM

**AND my whole thesis is that...Terence is simply regurgitating your words and those of people like Matt Thornton. My BS detector tells me that he's about 80% talk - and about 20% actual skills. And until he posts some vids that provide evidence otherwise - that's what he is, as far as I'm concerned.

Furthermore, I think this view of Terence is starting to become the consensus around here.

I have cited Thornton since he is a proven fight trainer (not to mention a BJJ BB and ex-sparring partner to Lennox Lewis) whose gyms have produced world-class level fighters and his views on training are readily available on the net (so people can check out his views on their own). It's funny that to you citing an actual proven expert is a bad thing. I have said that if we genuinely want good results in our training is it wise to listen to people LIKE him as opposed to listening to people like you.

FWIW, I don't ask anyone to take my word for anything, nor to use me as an example or authority. I tell them to go see for themselves -- to go visit good fighters and fight trainers. To use their criticial thinking skills. In other words, to do everything you don't do.

My view is that WCK is a fighting method, and if we want to develop good WCK skills -- which mean fighting skills -- then we need to train like good fighters train (not how poor fighters train), and that entails LISTENING to what good proven fight trainers and good proven fighters have to say.

I know that this view isn't popular, since it challenges people and their beliefs -- and many of these beliefs are tighly intertwined into their ego-structure (I am a sifu, a master, I learned from the grand poo-bah himself, I have the real wing chun, etc.). Stepping outside of your comfort bubble and your little pond is scary, not just physically but psychologically. But REAL growth is painful, it's not pleasant.

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 09:35 AM

or so you claim^
hoonestly you response as to why you left wing chun its the same response every person who fails at something give
basically to sum it up you just said"it was stupid"lol
perhaps the problem is you not the art

How long have you trained in WC? Who is your instructor?

goju

08-04-2009, 12:42 PM

goju

08-04-2009, 12:43 PM

This is the crux of the matter.

Go out and fight with proven, competent fighters and you'll see. If you don't do that, you'll never develop good skill and you'll never see. (Skill and understanding go hand-in-hand).
i was at alocal mma gym for close to a year before i left and my tma techniques worked just fine against boxers and kickboxers many of them were very east to get kicking techniques on

Pacman

08-04-2009, 01:12 PM

My view is that WCK is a fighting method, and if we want to develop good WCK skills -- which mean fighting skills -- then we need to train like good fighters train (not how poor fighters train), and that entails LISTENING to what good proven fight trainers and good proven fighters have to say.

you really dont listen

i dont think anyone here wants to train like a poor fighter

the question at hand is always whether we (everyone in this forum except you and dale) train well.

we claim we do. you think we dont because we disagree with you at times and you have it all figured out, and anyone who has it figured out like you will come to the same conclusions as you.

apparently you know more than even your heroes at the UFC, who use feints all the time--a move you frown upon

goju

08-04-2009, 01:28 PM

lol god he actuall frowned upon feints?
shakes head

ugh feints are used in mma particularly with lyoto machida watch his fight with tito again to sse

Lucas

08-04-2009, 02:22 PM

a black belt just means you mastered the basics of your style its nothing impressive

sometimes a black belt doesnt even mean that. depends on where you get it from....now a black belt in bjj....thats pretty different. if you dont mind me asking dale, how long did it take you to earn your black belt in bjj?

goju

08-04-2009, 02:25 PM

theres still i beleive twelve more ranks in bjj no? so therefore its still the same like in japanese ranking systems a black belt is master of the basic techniques

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 02:33 PM

one of my freinds father was awing chun master and i studied with him for a year before he moved back to china being in my state there arent any wig chun instructos i havent been able to further my training in the style
my style how ever is goju ryu karate whicj ive studied for the pst five years and i have also boxed since iwas six
No wonder you think black belt is a beginning stage. In your pretend fighting style, where they give black belts to kids, it is.

In BJJ, it takes 8-12 years to get a black belt and you will never see a kid running around sporting a black belt.

goju

08-04-2009, 02:37 PM

No wonder you think black belt is a beginning stage. In your pretend fighting style, where they give black belts to kids, it is.

In BJJ, it takes 8-12 years to get a black belt and you will never see a kid running around sporting a black belt.
no it is a beggining stage if it was an advanced belt there wouldnt be 11 more ranks in bjj
i could care less how long it takes you to get abjj black belt the fact is theres still alot more ranks to go thus it means you are a master of the basics
in japan or korea a good school it will take anywhere from six to nine years as well to bet a 1st degree black belt
again your ignorance on other styles is appalling

anerlich

08-04-2009, 02:43 PM

if we genuinely want good results in our training is it wise to listen to people LIKE him

Quoting Matt Thornton does not mean you and he have any common skills or experience. So best we ignore you, huh?

anerlich

08-04-2009, 02:44 PM

again your ignorance on other styles is appalling

Your ignorance of BJJ is appalling.

Ultimatewingchun

08-04-2009, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
"I have cited Thornton since he is a proven fight trainer (not to mention a BJJ BB and ex-sparring partner to Lennox Lewis) whose gyms have produced world-class level fighters and his views on training are readily available on the net..."

"...My view is that WCK is a fighting method, and if we want to develop good WCK skills -- which mean fighting skills -- then we need to train like good fighters train (not how poor fighters train), and that entails LISTENING to what good proven fight trainers and good proven fighters have to say."
....................................

AND THIS RESPONSE BY PACMAN:

you really dont listen

i dont think anyone here wants to train like a poor fighter

the question at hand is always whether we (everyone in this forum except you and dale) train well.

we claim we do. you think we dont because we disagree with you at times and you have it all figured out, and anyone who has it figured out like you will come to the same conclusions as you.

apparently you know more than even your heroes at the UFC, who use feints all the time--a move you frown upon
.................................

***ANOTHER good post from Pacman, regarding Terence Niehoff.

As if people around here (who know who Matt Thornton is) don't have respect for him, his approach to fighting, and the people he's trained.

Just another example of the stonewall approach to the issues by Niehoff.

The issue is not Matt Thornton, the issue is you.

goju

08-04-2009, 02:47 PM

Your ignorance of BJJ is appalling.
no its not i actually have done bjj but wasnt satisfied with it so i switched to judo
there are twelve ranks in bjj therefore a 1st degree black belts is still a begginer i dont care if it took him 30 years to get it
the only people who make a big deal out of a black belt are clueless yobs who have no idea about martial arts

anerlich

08-04-2009, 02:48 PM

there are twelve ranks in bjj

You appear to be both ignorant of BJJ and innumerate.

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 02:49 PM

sometimes a black belt doesnt even mean that. depends on where you get it from....now a black belt in bjj....thats pretty different. if you dont mind me asking dale, how long did it take you to earn your black belt in bjj?

I got it after 10 years of training.

goju

08-04-2009, 02:50 PM

how am i? ive seen helio walk around with twelve stripes on his belt

now let me see one compared to twelve
unless you cant count its not hard to get
i know bjj guys like to make a big deal about getting a black belt but its still not a big deal you still have along way to go

goju

08-04-2009, 02:52 PM

and please dont tell me the bull plop about a black belt in bjj being like a fourth of fith degree in other styles its ludicrousive heard it before and it makes me laugh
a black belts ablack belt in every style

Lucas

08-04-2009, 03:37 PM

a black belts ablack belt in every style

thats so un true it hurts.

your telling me that a 2 year bb 12 year old in some strip mall karate BS is the equivelant of a 10 year bb in kyokushin?

not even close man.

goju

08-04-2009, 03:42 PM

thats so un true it hurts.

your telling me that a 2 year bb 12 year old in some strip mall karate BS is the equivelant of a 10 year bb in kyokushin?

not even close man.
you seriously must be simple or you take me for bein that
why would a strip mall karate school even apply
im talking about the meaning of a black belt

Lucas

08-04-2009, 04:29 PM

goju

08-04-2009, 04:59 PM

well i dont know you from a hole in a wall so i just take what you write literally. because im a literal person.

and you can even take a strip mall school out of the equation.

some people give a black belt for different reasons, some people may offer them after about 3-5 years of when the basics are learned, others may make you master some more advanced material as well.

it does vary from style to style. sometimes drastically so, even amongst legitimate combat systems.

hell most chinese styles didnt do belts/sashes for a LONG time. some still dont.

but the ranking still applies if you get your black belt in bjj you are not a master of anything but your basic techniques just as if your a black belt in karate or taekwondo you are just a master of basic techniques
the belt ranking system that jigoro kano devised was designed to follow in a strict order once you reach black you have masters the basics there are usually up to ninth dan in most belt styles however in bjj there are more thus being a blackbelt in bjj is not a big deal because you still have along long long way to go
a black belt is just the beggining of your understanding of your martial art i allways laugh at people who get their black belt and walk around like they have ten tons balls because their understanding of the meaning behind the intention of the black belt is worth feck all

and i know more than likely dale will come on here and use that typical cacamamey saying among bjjpractioners that there blackbelts mean more thna ablack belt in other styles but thats nothing more than rediculous nonsense

Sihing73

08-04-2009, 05:17 PM

a black belts ablack belt in every style

Hello,

Sorry, but I have to disagree. A Black Belt is a marketting ploy in most cases today and thus it does not mean the same thing in different schools.

There are cases where Black Belts are awarded far before they are earned due to contacts and the need to keep the money rolling in. Also, there are schools which train much harder and whose lower belts are indeed the equal or betters of some other schools BB's.

Years ago while taking Judo I heard someone make this observation:

If you got your Black Belt in America then it is equal to anywhere from an orange to a brown.

If you got your Black Belt in Okinowa then it is equal to a Brown

If you got it in Japan then it is a real Black Belt.

Now I am not saying that is accurate, but it does show that many do indeed perceive a difference.

I remember going to a Silat School in Philly years ago. One of the students had only been practicing for about 8 months or so. I believed and still do, that this student would wipe the floor with most Black Belts. Of course since he had not MMA or BJJ experience I am sure there are some here who believe they would wipe the ground with him too :p

Hmm I wonder who is a more dangerous fighter......someone who spends a lot of time in the GYM fighting make believe (of course much different than a Theoretical Fighter :D) Or someone who, perhaps as part of their job, actually has fought people in the street for real. Not trying to score points but trying to stay alive. Of course we all know that some will claim this is not really relevant, they will cite the lack of video etc. They will go on training in their SAFE, SECURE little world of make believe and claim everyone who does not do it their way is the one living a Fantasy.

Some of those people even have the audacity to point out that someone who has fought for real, and has scars from live blades, must not be that good otherwise they would not have been cut. Now I have to say that is a REAL FANTASY APPROACH and shows THEIR LACK of REALISTIC COMBAT EXPERIENCE, imho of course. :rolleyes:

I imagine such people also think that going out in the woods and playing paintball is somehow equal to being in a real combat situation under live fire. :eek:

Everyone one here has the right to their own opinions and the right to train as they see fit, for what they feel is needed and relevant to their needs. Those who keep putting others down for not doing things thier way are just as guilty as living in the fanatasy world they accuse others of.

Sorry, but believing that fighting in a GYM is the same as fighting in the street is also a FANTASY. Of course fighting in a MMA GYM etc is going to provide skills that will be of benefit on the street. However to think that only those who fight or train YOUR way is to shows ones own ignorance and shortsightedness.

Oh, while I am on the subject neither Dan Inosonto nor Richard Bustillio (please forgive my spelling) would be considered as a Wing Chun practicianer. To claim to have learned Wing Chun and cite them as having trained you shows a lack of WC knowledge in and of itself. Both are respectable Martial Artists, but neither is a Wing Chun person. Hawkins Cheung is another story although last time I checked he did not teach SN WC :confused: so I am not sure where that came from, although I suppose it is possible.

goju

08-04-2009, 06:22 PM

ugh good lord you people dont get what im saying
i dont care about the majority of schools handing out belts i dont care about what a belt here is like a belt over across the world
the point is a black belts simply means your a master of your basic techniques end of story wether you deserve the belt or not that is what a black belt signifies

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 07:13 PM

Oh, while I am on the subject neither Dan Inosonto nor Richard Bustillio (please forgive my spelling) would be considered as a Wing Chun practicianer. To claim to have learned Wing Chun and cite them as having trained you shows a lack of WC knowledge in and of itself. Both are respectable Martial Artists, but neither is a Wing Chun person. Hawkins Cheung is another story although last time I checked he did not teach SN WC :confused: so I am not sure where that came from, although I suppose it is possible.

Um... let's see. Dan trained under Bruce Lee who trained under Ip Man. That would make him third generation WC.

How many steps removed from Ip Man are you and what makes you think you are a WC practitioner and he is not?

Knifefighter

08-04-2009, 07:19 PM

goju

08-04-2009, 07:36 PM

Sihing73

08-04-2009, 08:45 PM

Um... let's see. Dan trained under Bruce Lee who trained under Ip Man. That would make him third generation WC.

How many steps removed from Ip Man are you and what makes you think you are a WC practitioner and he is not?

Hmm, so Dan is a Wing Chun Practicianer and he makes this claim?? By your standards I guess someone who attends a couple of seminars under a big name can claim to be a WC practicianer as well. Let's see Joe Lewis and Chuck Norris also trained with Bruce Lee as well as Jesse Glover.......are they WC people too? What about James Demile who also trained with Bruce and developed Wing Chun Do? James must be because he even kept WC in the name :)

As to what generation I am let's see it depends on which lineage you want to go buy.

YM>HKM>AF>Roy Undem>Me

YM>LT>Allan Fong/Keith Kernsprecht>Me
Oh, I also lived in Allans home as part of his family but you probably would not know anything about that type of relationship.

YM>LS>NWS>Chung Kwok Chow>Me

Do I get some sort of prize now? :D

Sihing73

08-04-2009, 09:13 PM

The fact is that most guys have had street fights by the time they are teenagers. Doesn't mean they have a clue about fighting. Same with law enforcement, bouncers, etc. The majority of them have no clue how to actually fight a skilled, resisting opponent.

What's funny to me are bullsh!ters like you who claim to have all this life and death fighting experience. If that was really the case, it would be just a simple walk in the park for you to show a clip of yourself going full out with no gear against resisting opponents in a training facility. That would be nothing compared to what you supposedly have been through in real life.

However, we all know that your "law enforcement" fighting background is non-existent and it would be too scary for you to actually go full on even in the relatively safe confines of a training facility.

The one thing you are right about is that fighting in the gym is not fighting in the street. You are also right when you say there often are no videos in the street. All of us who have done real street encounters, both on the job and off know this. We also know that those who claim "street experience" but have no other evidence of their abilities are almost always full of sh!t.

As far as the live blade training and the scars, give me a frikkin' break. Must have been pretty hard to explain to the authorities how all the students were constantly getting killed. It's hard to imagine that you could be stupid enough to think people are stupid enough to think you went around fighting each other with live blades.

ROFLMAO :D

Of course you are correct Dale, keep living in your world of Fantasy believing that because you "play" at fighting you are some sort of scary all knowing fighter.

My Law Enforcement Experience is fantasy..........but that occupation put food on the table for many years. :p My skills are so lacking that I was tasked to Train Defensive Tactics at a Prison as well as for a few Police Departments. Of course this really proves nothing as I am sure you believe any scrub can become a trainer. After all don't you or didn't you also offer self defense training through a fitness club? As I asked you in a PM what was the standard by which you taught others self defense? Were they all exposed to BJJ and MMA? If not, did you somehow train others in a less than adequate method of self defense in order to make a buck? :confused:

As to training with live blades, yes that did happen although not as often as you may believe, of course if you really were an "original dog brother" you would already know this as a major basis for their approach came from Pekiti Tirsia. No one "fought with live blades" but there were and are many drills done with live blades, are you saying you have never heard of this........and yet you claim the monicker of "Knifefighter" lol. Maybe you used a butter knife for training. :p The scars I make reference to were from real life street encounters, have been stabbed, shot, hit in the head with a beer bottle and beaten with a chain. Believe me I have had my butt handed to me on more than one occassion. None of my experience gives me the right to claim to be some super warrior nor to disdain anyone who has not had the same experience. But it certainly did open my eyes to some things. So I can easily look down on your lack of real life experience as you hide out in the Gym with your buddies. Despite how much you say you go full force etc, the fact remains that you have limits and rules, as well you should in that environment the little bit of real fights I had did not have rules and in some cases people were really trying to hurt me, but my ability to tap and shout ref "foul" served me well on the street.

Hey, if you really want to check up on my Law Enforcement Background feel free to contact the Philadelphia Housing Police as well as the PA State Police. Who knows maybe you're right and it is all fantasy. I just hope they don' want all those paychecks back. :p

I suppose the act of making an arrest when the suspect does not want to go is nothing in comparison to rolling on the ground on a nice soft mat. I am sure that the resistance offered is nothing compared to what you have experienced. :rolleyes:

Sorry Dale, but to be quite frank I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else. I have mellowed a lot and learned as I grew older. When younger I used to go with my Ranger buddies to local bars in Georgia to get into fights with locals. Not something which was very smart and certainly not the thing to do today. Of course we all know that all of the locals were scrubs because they did not attend the KF and T school of reality Wii Gym training. By they way when is your new game coming out??

Dale, I sincerly hope that one day we have an opportunity to meet and work out together, not a challenge and no ill will intended. Doubtless you may have something of value to offer to me. Perhaps you will also be surprised at some of the things I can bring to the table. One thing for sure I have no problem with stepping up to the plate and am not hard to find.

If asked for my location I won't give a state but will list a town, for example Philly or at present Toccoa, Ga. Rather than ask for video perhaps it would be more convincing to meet in person with those you claim are full of it. Since T is a lawyer perhaps he could even draw up waivers for everyone involved. Such a meeting could also be put on video and youtube for all to see. We are pretty close in age and perhaps some of my past injuries could compensate for a lack of.........height?

Pacman

08-04-2009, 11:31 PM

Um... let's see. Dan trained under Bruce Lee who trained under Ip Man. That would make him third generation WC.

How many steps removed from Ip Man are you and what makes you think you are a WC practitioner and he is not?

because bruce wasnt a very high level WC practitioner. because bruce lee took some WC knowledge and made his own style JKD, which he taught to inosanto, not WC

chusauli

08-05-2009, 06:27 AM

Hello,

Sorry, but I have to disagree. A Black Belt is a marketting ploy in most cases today and thus it does not mean the same thing in different schools.

There are cases where Black Belts are awarded far before they are earned due to contacts and the need to keep the money rolling in. Also, there are schools which train much harder and whose lower belts are indeed the equal or betters of some other schools BB's.

Years ago while taking Judo I heard someone make this observation:

If you got your Black Belt in America then it is equal to anywhere from an orange to a brown.

If you got your Black Belt in Okinowa then it is equal to a Brown

If you got it in Japan then it is a real Black Belt.

Now I am not saying that is accurate, but it does show that many do indeed perceive a difference.

I remember going to a Silat School in Philly years ago. One of the students had only been practicing for about 8 months or so. I believed and still do, that this student would wipe the floor with most Black Belts. Of course since he had not MMA or BJJ experience I am sure there are some here who believe they would wipe the ground with him too :p

Hmm I wonder who is a more dangerous fighter......someone who spends a lot of time in the GYM fighting make believe (of course much different than a Theoretical Fighter :D) Or someone who, perhaps as part of their job, actually has fought people in the street for real. Not trying to score points but trying to stay alive. Of course we all know that some will claim this is not really relevant, they will cite the lack of video etc. They will go on training in their SAFE, SECURE little world of make believe and claim everyone who does not do it their way is the one living a Fantasy.

Some of those people even have the audacity to point out that someone who has fought for real, and has scars from live blades, must not be that good otherwise they would not have been cut. Now I have to say that is a REAL FANTASY APPROACH and shows THEIR LACK of REALISTIC COMBAT EXPERIENCE, imho of course. :rolleyes:

I imagine such people also think that going out in the woods and playing paintball is somehow equal to being in a real combat situation under live fire. :eek:

Everyone one here has the right to their own opinions and the right to train as they see fit, for what they feel is needed and relevant to their needs. Those who keep putting others down for not doing things thier way are just as guilty as living in the fanatasy world they accuse others of.

Sorry, but believing that fighting in a GYM is the same as fighting in the street is also a FANTASY. Of course fighting in a MMA GYM etc is going to provide skills that will be of benefit on the street. However to think that only those who fight or train YOUR way is to shows ones own ignorance and shortsightedness.

Oh, while I am on the subject neither Dan Inosonto nor Richard Bustillio (please forgive my spelling) would be considered as a Wing Chun practicianer. To claim to have learned Wing Chun and cite them as having trained you shows a lack of WC knowledge in and of itself. Both are respectable Martial Artists, but neither is a Wing Chun person. Hawkins Cheung is another story although last time I checked he did not teach SN WC :confused: so I am not sure where that came from, although I suppose it is possible.

Dave, I found your post to be largely true!

I think the observation of Black belt in the USA is largely true. I think Black belts in Okinawa for Karate (not Judo) are real blackbelts, and I think the Japanese made up all this stuff up and they determined what is Black belt in Judo, Karate, Kendo, etc. But really Blackbelt refers to Dan ranking - A blackbelt in the USA really is just a beginner. He's a Shodan - First step. Hardly a teacher or master.

Beyond San Dan (Third step), I'd say it means something. After 5th Dan, its mostly honorary...

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 07:02 AM

Robert makes a valid point.
To me a BB was simply a "high school diploma" of sorts, the real learning came after.
Between the 1st degree and the 4th, those (typically) 9 years are the crucial ones in a person development as a MA.
Wither it takes someone 5 years to get a BB or 10 years doesn't mean much to me, its what they can do with it and their understanding that it is the beginning of the journey, not the end.
A friend of mine came back from the Kodokan with his new Nidan and he was blown away at the level of skill of the Shodan there compared to those here in N.America, the reason wasn't that they were better are more skiled at Judo, just that they were more experienced in other systems and they brought that into their judo ( many judoka are karate or aikido practioners too, some are grapplers also).

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 07:31 AM

Hmm I wonder who is a more dangerous fighter......someone who spends a lot of time in the GYM fighting make believe (of course much different than a Theoretical Fighter :D) Or someone who, perhaps as part of their job, actually has fought people in the street for real. Not trying to score points but trying to stay alive. Of course we all know that some will claim this is not really relevant, they will cite the lack of video etc. They will go on training in their SAFE, SECURE little world of make believe and claim everyone who does not do it their way is the one living a Fantasy.

The MYTH of the streetfighter.

Let's first consider fighting skill -- as opposed to where you use it, OK?

How does one develop good and even higher level fighting skill? By fighting. You can't develop it to any significant degree any other way. You don't become a better fighter by not fighting. You need to practice ANY skill to develop that skill, and you need to practice it as you are going to do it. That means lots of sparring/practice. With me so far?

And the level of your skill will obviously depend on the amount of practice you put in on that skill, right?

Fighting skill is like any other athletic and/or competitive skill (why would it be any different?). While you need to fight to develop your fighting skill, the people you fight with -- your sparring partners -- are extremely important. Why? Since they provide the impetus, the push, the challenge to force you to grow; they show you your mistakes (by taking advantage of them); they provide examples of good skills in action; etc. Hence the saying, "You are only as good as your sparring partners." You don't become a good boxer just sparring with poor boxers, or a good grappler only grappling with poor grapplers.

So, to sum it up: fighting skill is directly proportional to the amount of quality sparring/fighitng (practice) that a person does. It's really that simple.

Now, how can we measure our own progress, our own performance level? How can we know our own skill level? That can only be done by and through actual performance (fighting) and juding that against some "standard" that we know. For example, how can I know how good a boxer I am? Well, first I need to actually box ,getin the ring and box (perform). And, second, I determine my performance level by the level of boxers I can beat or hold my own against (level of opposition).

Let's apply that to streetfighting: I'm a boxer and I get into a streetfight and manage to win -- what does that really say? At most, it says that I was "better" skilled than some unknown, probably unskilled, out of shape guy. And it may not even show that since I may have won for many other reasons besides my boxing skill -- I may have been bigger and stronger and just over-powered him, I may have been lucky, I may have thrown out my boxing and just won with my natural instincts, and so on. There is realy no way to tell. Streetfights only tell us a result, not anything about the performance or performance level in getting the result.

The thing about fighting skill is that it works on demand -- if you are a skilled fighter, then you can use those skills in a ring, in a cage, in a gym or on the street. Any time and any place.

Some of those people even have the audacity to point out that someone who has fought for real, and has scars from live blades, must not be that good otherwise they would not have been cut. Now I have to say that is a REAL FANTASY APPROACH and shows THEIR LACK of REALISTIC COMBAT EXPERIENCE, imho of course. :rolleyes:

As I said, streetfighting only talks about a result not about performance or performance level. I have knife scars on both my hands and my abdomen from a knife attack (mugging) that I survived years ago, so what? Does this prove I have high level fighting skills? That I am a master? This proves nothing.

Any time you fight it is for REAL -- if your opponent is really trying to knock your block off, choke you out, break your arm, etc. it is for REAL. You will really get knocked out, you will really get choked out, you will really get things broken. I am recovering right now from a fractured ankle that I got from not tapping (fast enough). It's a real fractured ankle. Because in training we stop (if the other guy is smart enough to tap) doesn't make it unreal.

I imagine such people also think that going out in the woods and playing paintball is somehow equal to being in a real combat situation under live fire. :eek:

Everyone one here has the right to their own opinions and the right to train as they see fit, for what they feel is needed and relevant to their needs. Those who keep putting others down for not doing things thier way are just as guilty as living in the fanatasy world they accuse others of.

Sorry, but believing that fighting in a GYM is the same as fighting in the street is also a FANTASY. Of course fighting in a MMA GYM etc is going to provide skills that will be of benefit on the street. However to think that only those who fight or train YOUR way is to shows ones own ignorance and shortsightedness.

No one has said that fighitng in a gym is the same as fighting in the streets. But fighting is fighting. The skills you need to fight are the same. What we need to develop those skills are the same. Fighting in a cage in front of an audience isn't the same as fighting in the gym. Fighting in crowded bar isn't the same as fighting in a vacant alley. We could go on drawing distinction after distinction -- but that doesn't alter the fact that fighting is fighitng, and the skills you need don't change. The tactics -- how you use those skills -- may change depending on the situation.

A big part ofthe problem appreciating this is that many of the people who idolize the so-called "streetfighters" or guys who have physical encounters (often not actual fights) with their jobs (LEOs, etc.), simply haven't put in time with really good proven fighters to see just how good those people really are.

Oh, while I am on the subject neither Dan Inosonto nor Richard Bustillio (please forgive my spelling) would be considered as a Wing Chun practicianer. To claim to have learned Wing Chun and cite them as having trained you shows a lack of WC knowledge in and of itself. Both are respectable Martial Artists, but neither is a Wing Chun person. Hawkins Cheung is another story although last time I checked he did not teach SN WC :confused: so I am not sure where that came from, although I suppose it is possible.

Let me address what I think refers directly to me. I trained with Robert Chu, whose curriculum includes the YM, YKS (SN), Gu Lao 40 point branches of WCK. I never formally trained in YKS WCK though I am acquinted with the curriculum (the san sik, forms, etc.). As Gu Lao (which I did lentirely learn) uses san sik (alos with turning, btw), I do have experience with them.

But, I think your comment confuses subject matter with curriculum. WCK is the subject matter, the various lienages/branches are ONLY various curriculums to teach the same subject matter. A simple analogy bicycle riding. That is the subject matter-- riding the bike. You can have all kinds of different "ways" or approaches to teaching how to ride the bike. Those currisulums can include various concepts or ideas, have different "forms", different exercises, etc. but those things are all beginner-level things -- and ultimately not important. What is important is riding the bike. When we focus on the text, we often miss the subject matter itself.

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 08:44 AM

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 08:53 AM

The MYTH of the streetfighter.

Just as pertainent as the MYTH OF THE GYM FIGHTER :D

Sure the more skills developed as well as being better physically trained will have benefit. But to think that ONLY those trainng as you do is just as much fantasy, IMHO.

So when was the last time you fought more than one guy at a time who were weilding some type of weapon? Sticks, bottles, chains whatever? How does YOUR training prepare you for that scenerio?

Oh, I forgot, this type of scenerio would never happen on the street as you would be facing scrubs with no real skill and they would line up to attack you one at a time and would just wade into you swinging wildly. :rolleyes:

I have no problem with training in the GYM or exploring other arts, MMA or BJJ, to enhance ones skills. I do however believe that putting others down who opt not to train as you do, presenting yourself and your approach as some sort of end all be all is just as much fantasy as those who type behind a keyboard and rely on the stories of past masters.

I am not nor do I claim to be any type of champion street fighter. My experience is that when you enter into a fight on the street just about everyone involved gets hurt. I prefer to walk or run away whenever possible.

My goal is no to be the next great MMA fighter and as it is highly doubtful I will run into someone so highly skilled there really is no need for me to reach that level. I would rather enjoy my life and be prepared for the most likely scenerio I am going to face.

FWIW I know of several high level very competivie MA's who have gottent their butts handed to them on the street. I remember one guy I taught who was always getting on me about being in better shape. He was appalled when I taught and practiced groin strikes, however after I took him to a Kuntao camp he quickly got his cup out and wore it, although he thought we were all cheats. :D

T, you base things on your own experience and that is fine, it is your right. If I had the time, money and inclination and was a bit younger I may be doing the same thing. However, to discount anothers experience because it does not fit into your cookie cutter approach is also wrong and short-sighted.

I have made arrests which got to be quite physical at times. Some involved those who were mentally ill, some may even be posting on this forum :p, in some cases the only option was to attempt to physically restrain and control someone. Does this experience somehow pale to that found in the gym?

What I am saying is that some have gone out and tried their skills in real life and are still here, having learned as well as survived, yet it seems that when such experience does not lend credence to the GYM SPAR approach it is somehow minimized. Often under the cry of "NO VIDEO-then it didn't happen".

I am sorry but who really has more experience the guy putting his life on the line or the guy training with friends or others not really trying to hurt you?

To be honest how anyone else opts to train is their business and as I siad before everyone has the right to train as they feel appropriate. I can assure you that if we were living in an environment in which my skills in WC were relevant to DAY to DAY SURVIVAL then I woudl certainly being training differently. But the reality is that in a real street situation any attack will most likely come by surprise without warning and ones ability to absorb that initial attack and have the mental toughness to keep fighting will be more of an assett than whether one has sparred some MMA of BJJ guy at the local gym. Of course, just to be clear, the very act of rolling or accepting hits like in boxing, can have a positive affect, but are not needed to make your art effective.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 08:59 AM

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 09:07 AM

As someone who has done both streetfighting and competitive fighting I can say this:
The argument is pointless.
While a streefight is more dangerous (potentially) it is NOT as testing as a competitive fight with a skilled opponent.
And while a competitive fight is far more testing, it is not more dangerous than an altercation on the street with some deranged fool with god knows what in his pocket and god knows what in his system.

Its not a case of either / or as to whom is the "real MA", you can't be a "real MA' without BOTH.

Its just that simple.

Frankly, I think the whole idea of being a "real MA" -- like "real fighting" or "real WCK" -- is a nonissue. It is a misconception that some people try to use as a justification for their lack of skill.

Skill is real. Conditioning is real. Neither can be faked.

Can you consistently get out of a headlock? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently escape the mount? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently deal with someone trying to knock your block off? And can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Etc. That's what it is about.

And btw, the whole issue of whether or not "streetfighting" is potentially more dangerous is irrelevent. So what IF (for the sake of argument) it is? So what? What does that prove ABOUT THE FIGHTER? Nothing. Does that mean that people who win streetfights have good fighting skills? Of course not. The thinking that (a) streetfights are dangerous, (b) so-and-so won several/many streetfights, therfore (c) so-and-so must be a good fighter is fallacious and poor reasoning.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 09:15 AM

Sorry Dale, but to be quite frank I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else.

LOL... yet you write treatises on how your "experiences" somehow make you not full of sh!t. You could have done 10 clips in the time you have wasted with your b.s. writing. Nothing to prove, huh? Yeah, right. More like nothing to show.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 09:21 AM

So when was the last time you fought more than one guy at a time who were weilding some type of weapon? Sticks, bottles, chains whatever? How does YOUR training prepare you for that scenerio?
Too funny that you think you are the only one who has ever mixed it up in the street against multiple opponents and weapons. Most of us "gym fighters" got into it precisely because of our street backgrounds.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 09:24 AM

J Of course, just to be clear, the very act of rolling or accepting hits like in boxing, can have a positive affect, but are not needed to make your art effective.

Bullsh!t again. Probably THE most important factor in street fighting is the ability to take punishment. Again, if you actually had ever mixed it up for real you would know this.

And if you really had experienced all the injuries and attacks you say you have, you would know this without a doubt.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 09:28 AM

LOL... yet you write treatises on how your "experiences" somehow make you not full of sh!t. You could have done 10 clips in the time you have wasted with your b.s. writing. Nothing to prove, huh? Yeah, right. More like nothing to show.

Of course, sometimes even a Blind man sees more than one with eyese. Keep your blinders on, you will doubtless get where you are headed but perhaps miss some of the scenary along the way.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 09:32 AM

Too funny that you think you are the only one who has ever mixed it up in the street against multiple opponents and weapons. Most of us "gym fighters" got into it precisely because of our street backgrounds.

Ahh of course you were such a terror on the street and this led you to the GYM?? Just what street background did you have?

Also, could you please post the part when I claimed to be the ONLY one to have ever mixed it up on the street? Unlike you, I do not need to put others down to make myself feel better just because they happen to disagree with me.

Of course in your world those who think differenlty are full of something, right?

I try to void as often as possible just to prevent such a situation :D

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 09:39 AM

Bullsh!t again. Probably THE most important factor in street fighting is the ability to take punishment. Again, if you actually had ever mixed it up for real you would know this.

And if you really had experienced all the injuries and attacks you say you have, you would know this without a doubt.

Well Dale, please read through the entire post. I have not said the ability to take or absorb punishment was not an asset, however to claim that is the most important thing is also incorrect. Tell me, would you opt to absorb the blow of a club or the thrust of a knife? Seems to me that one should seek to avoid accepting punishment but be prepared for the fact that it is most likely to happen, in may cases the mental focus is far more important than the physical, although the physical certainly helps. Now try to read this whole paragraph and grasp what I am saying;)

Dale, I have been hit a lot harder than some and not so hard as others. Of course since I do not bow down to you and your way of thinking, I am full of it, right?

Sorry dude, but I would be willing to bet I could hold my own if needed. Of course to you this is all BS and it is interesting that you can't accept another point of view without resorting to attempts to insult............very telling about a lot of things I would think. :p

chusauli

08-05-2009, 09:39 AM

YM>LS>Chung Kwok Chow>Me

Do I get some sort of prize now? :D

No prize, just want to say that Chung Kwok Chow studied with Ng Wah Sum, a student of Leung Sheung, not Leung Sheung,

So your lineage will look like:

YM>LS>NWS>Chung Kwok Chow>Me

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 09:43 AM

No prize, just want to say that Chung Kwok Chow studied with Ng Wah Sum, a student of Leung Sheung, not Leung Sheung,

So you lineage will look like:

YM>LS>NWS>Chung Kwok Chow>Me

:o Robert you are quite right and I appoligize for my error. Especially since having had the privilege of meeting with and training with Ng Wah Sum.

I was wondering why my generation looked the same but I worked late last night.

Thanks for point that out I will edit my post to reflect the correct lineage as I slink away into my hole in shame. Please don't tell Sifu Chow :o

chusauli

08-05-2009, 09:46 AM

chusauli

08-05-2009, 09:47 AM

:o Robert you are quite right and I appoligize for my error. Especially since having had the privilege of meeting with and training with Ng Wah Sum.

I was wondering why my generation looked the same but I worked late last night.

Thanks for point that out I will edit my post to reflect the correct lineage as I slink away into my hole in shame. Please don't tell Sifu Chow :o

No sweat dude! :)

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 09:50 AM

Dale, I have been hit a lot harder than some and not so hard as others. Of course since I do not bow down to you and your way of thinking, I am full of it, right?
You are not full of sh!t because you don't bow down to my way of thinking or not agree with my viewpoint. What makes the probability high that you are full of sh!t is the fact that you have a need to explain your skills, but can use only your own words rambling on about all the things you have done in the past as evidence that you actually have any skills. My experience has been that the guys who can only talk about how tough they are are always the guys who can do the least and fold the quickest.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 09:50 AM

Guys,

This gym vs. Street argument is getting no where and a lot of puffery going around, along with a lot of irrelevant stuff.

I'm sure all of you are deadly, and that if I tried to mess with your family or loved ones, I'd be toast. :)

If people need to survive, it'd all depend on circumstances, timing of the moment, awareness, conditioning, experience, etc. I'm sure all of you would channel it.

You're all a bunch of deadly ninja assassins!

Chill out!

Robert,

You are of course correct. But I would never try to fight you, I would tell you the same thing I told Keith Kernsprecht....................I would stand a good distance away and just shoot him.

I always had a fondness for the female ninjas...........now there is someone I would not mind rolling with :D

So to end this I am full of crap, I have never fought anyone, I live in my mothers basement and this is my outlet as I have no social life. Although online I am quite a different story........they even made a song about me. :D

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 09:55 AM

Hmm, so Dan is a Wing Chun Practicianer and he makes this claim?? By your standards I guess someone who attends a couple of seminars under a big name can claim to be a WC practicianer as well.

Dan received training from Bruce for years and was the instructor for the majority of Bruce's classes. Most people who claim to have studied under Bruce actually received a majority of their training from Dan.

LOL @ some unknown guy somewhere down the line making the decision that one of most knowledgeable martial artists of all time is not a WC practitioner. Talk about an overblown ego.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 09:57 AM

Just as pertainent as the MYTH OF THE GYM FIGHTER :D

Sure the more skills developed as well as being better physically trained will have benefit. But to think that ONLY those trainng as you do is just as much fantasy, IMHO.

The training you NEED to do depends on what skill you want to develop.

So when was the last time you fought more than one guy at a time who were weilding some type of weapon? Sticks, bottles, chains whatever? How does YOUR training prepare you for that scenerio?

What prepares anyone for fighting is to develop their (fundamental) fighting skills and their conditioning. If someone doesn't have good fighting skills and if they aren't in very good condition, then they won't have a chance in a situation like that.

Oh, I forgot, this type of scenerio would never happen on the street as you would be facing scrubs with no real skill and they would line up to attack you one at a time and would just wade into you swinging wildly. :rolleyes:

Do you remember the Uriah Faber Bali-fight?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOQLg7Kc8So

Look, if you can't consistently beat one guy with some skills who really fighting you, what makes you believe that you will be able to beat several?

There are no doubts all kinds -- too many to count -- of situations that we can dream up? Do we practice all of them? Or, do we focus on developing good, solid, sound fundamental fighting skills and conditioning so that we will have the tools and the physical ability to use those tools?

Did Uriah fight in Bali like he does in the cage? Yes and no. He used his fighting skills and conditioning, but he used different tactics because the situation (Bali vs. cage) was different. He adapted his skills to what was going on. This is what fighters do.

I have no problem with training in the GYM or exploring other arts, MMA or BJJ, to enhance ones skills. I do however believe that putting others down who opt not to train as you do, presenting yourself and your approach as some sort of end all be all is just as much fantasy as those who type behind a keyboard and rely on the stories of past masters.

I'm not trying to put anyone down -- I'm trying to get people to see what things they need to do to develop fighting (WCK) skill. If someone says they believe doing forms and chi sao and a bit of light sparring will develop fighting skill, they are wrong. I'm not putting them down to say that. It is simply true. The evidence is there. And they can see it for themselves IF THEY WANT TO.

BTW, it is not MY approach -- I am saying look at how good fighters (people we know from evidence are good) and good fight trainers say to train. They know what we must do to develop skills. Some will attempt to argue that yes, they know ONE way but there are other ways, and that's where the question of evidence comes in: where is the evidence that these other ways develop good, fighting skills (the proof we can see)?

I am not nor do I claim to be any type of champion street fighter. My experience is that when you enter into a fight on the street just about everyone involved gets hurt. I prefer to walk or run away whenever possible.

My goal is no to be the next great MMA fighter and as it is highly doubtful I will run into someone so highly skilled there really is no need for me to reach that level. I would rather enjoy my life and be prepared for the most likely scenerio I am going to face.

Let's say you go join a BJJ class. You don't aspire to fight MMA or competitively. Does it matter to you whether what you learn really works in fighting? Does it matter to you whether you really develop the skill to use what you learn against genuinely resisting opponents? If these things don't matter to you, then it really doesn't matter what you learn or how you learn it. But if these things do matter, even if you simply like being able to roll in class and be able to use them on the street should the occassion ever arise, then what you train and how you train it does matter.

FWIW I know of several high level very competivie MA's who have gottent their butts handed to them on the street. I remember one guy I taught who was always getting on me about being in better shape. He was appalled when I taught and practiced groin strikes, however after I took him to a Kuntao camp he quickly got his cup out and wore it, although he thought we were all cheats. :D

Fighting anywhere is a game of chance. Developing skill and conditioning only increases your chances, but isn't a guarantee. Many streeet fights are suprprise assaults.

If I were training with a bunch of guys that kept trying to hit my groin, I'd wear a cup too. :) But your comment indicates that you don't understand "sport" type training. In MT, for example, they don't kick the groin. But they practice really kicking with all their might, in fighting. While they may not kick you in the groin in the gym, it is very easy for them to kick you in the groin "on the street". Why? Because they have developed awesome kicks, accurate and powerful, with good timing, etc. from their training/sparring. They don't allow kicks to the groin in training because they can't really practice them full power.

It's the same with "foul tactics", like biting and gouging, on the ground. BJJ folks don't practice those things since they'd be constantly injuring each other. But put a good BJJ guy on the ground "in the street" and he'll poke his fingers in your eyes (it's a great set up for an armbar from the mount).

You see, your ability to do even the "foul stuff" depends on having good, solid fundamental fighting skills, and those come from sound, athletic training.

T, you base things on your own experience and that is fine, it is your right. If I had the time, money and inclination and was a bit younger I may be doing the same thing. However, to discount anothers experience because it does not fit into your cookie cutter approach is also wrong and short-sighted.

I don't just base my views on my experience, but on the experience of PROVEN good fighters and fight trainers (not to mention sport science). I'm not young anymore, I'll be 50 in a few days. But as one of my training partners reminds me, "The game doesn't change because we get older." The game doesn't change and neither does what we need to do to get good or stay good at the game. Dan Inosanto took up BJJ at 60! Got his BB at 70. He did what anyone who wants to develop good ground skills NEEDS to do. That's not a "cookie cutter approach" -- it's the process for developing skill. You develop swimming skill by swimming, you develop surfing skill by surfing, you develop boxing skill by boxing, you develop BJJ skill by grappling, you develop fighting skill by fighitng.

I have made arrests which got to be quite physical at times. Some involved those who were mentally ill, some may even be posting on this forum :p, in some cases the only option was to attempt to physically restrain and control someone. Does this experience somehow pale to that found in the gym?

What I am saying is that some have gone out and tried their skills in real life and are still here, having learned as well as survived, yet it seems that when such experience does not lend credence to the GYM SPAR approach it is somehow minimized. Often under the cry of "NO VIDEO-then it didn't happen".

I am sorry but who really has more experience the guy putting his life on the line or the guy training with friends or others not really trying to hurt you?

Putting your life on the line doesn't mean you have good fighting skill.

Certainly LEOs have certain skill sets, but that doesn't mean that it invovles much fighting skill. There is a guy at my BJJ school who is a(male) nurse at a hospital that treats violent mental patients. He's had loads of confrontations, "fights", etc. But he's not using his BJJ -- he's not choking his patients out or breaking their arms. ;) He's not better at BJJ because of his job either. I know that I couldn't do his job-- he has developed certain skills, awareness, etc. that I don't have. I acknowledge that, and respect him for it. But I don't look to him as someone who "really knows" and understands fighting and how to train to fight.

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 09:58 AM

Frankly, I think the whole idea of being a "real MA" -- like "real fighting" or "real WCK" -- is a nonissue. It is a misconception that some people try to use as a justification for their lack of skill.

Skill is real. Conditioning is real. Neither can be faked.

Can you consistently get out of a headlock? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently escape the mount? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently deal with someone trying to knock your block off? And can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Etc. That's what it is about.

And btw, the whole issue of whether or not "streetfighting" is potentially more dangerous is irrelevent. So what IF (for the sake of argument) it is? So what? What does that prove ABOUT THE FIGHTER? Nothing. Does that mean that people who win streetfights have good fighting skills? Of course not. The thinking that (a) streetfights are dangerous, (b) so-and-so won several/many streetfights, therfore (c) so-and-so must be a good fighter is fallacious and poor reasoning.

To say that, in regards to MA training, that whether a kind of altercation is more dangerous is irrelevant, brings back ehcos to the days of point competition.
If you think you fight the same when your life or the life of someone you love is on the line, like you do when you are in the ring, you Sir are dilusional.
Its not a question of streetfights being dangerous, its a question of the type of danger that has potential to occur.
To NOT take that into account makes no sense to me, but hey, to each their own.

chusauli

08-05-2009, 09:59 AM

LOL!

Female ninjas are great! Dying while having sex with one is a great way to go! Who wouldn't want to be with a kunoichi in the act and then get stabbed with a poisoned hairpin?

http://conventionfans.today.com/files/2009/03/femaleninja.jpg

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 10:00 AM

Too funny that you think you are the only one who has ever mixed it up in the street against multiple opponents and weapons. Most of us "gym fighters" got into it precisely because of our street backgrounds.

Dale makes a very important point that seems to be lost on many people the devalue sport competition.
Fact is, far more people in sport systems have 'real fight" experience than those in fairyland MA.

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 10:10 AM

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 10:12 AM

Do you remember the Uriah Faber Bali-fight?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOQLg7Kc8So

Is there an ACTUAL VIDEO of this "fight" or just here say and anecdotes?

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 10:28 AM

To say that, in regards to MA training, that whether a kind of altercation is more dangerous is irrelevant, brings back ehcos to the days of point competition.
If you think you fight the same when your life or the life of someone you love is on the line, like you do when you are in the ring, you Sir are dilusional.
Its not a question of streetfights being dangerous, its a question of the type of danger that has potential to occur.
To NOT take that into account makes no sense to me, but hey, to each their own.

The whole "Streetfighting" issue is fantasy sh1t.

If you are attacked on the street, you will do whatever you can do, What that is will depend on your skill, your conditioning, and your experience. If you don't have skills you can't use them. If you don't have conditioning, you won't be able to do anything for very long.

If you are attacked, are you going to box like you do in the ring or do BJJ like you do on the mats? Yes and no. You are going to use those same skills, your conditioning, and experience to fight. Your tactics may change based on the circumstances. If you are mounted and don't have the skills to get out of a mount, it won't matter if the fight is for your life or not. The potential consequence doesn't change the need for the skill or how it is acquired. Nor does it change how you perform it. What exactly does the potential consequence change in terms of your performance?

Well, it can impose some psychological impairment -- assuming, that is, that you have the time to think about the potential consequences. But IME when we are assualted, that rarely happens. The fight in on you and you are reacting. It is only afterward that you look back and consider the consequences.

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 11:11 AM

The fantasy part of streetfighting is thinking that it is a true test of your skills, it isn't, it is, at best, a test of your survival instincts and at worst, a test of how well your hands hold up to beating on some poor a-holes face.
A trained fighter will ALWAYS have the upper hand VS a typical street brawler in regards to skill and conditioning, there is no question about that, that is irrelevant to what one can get out of a street fight in terms of experience.
I recall a friend of mine who learned the hard way that "every punch counts" when he got punched over and over by a guy who put his car keys between his fingers in a fist, it cost him his left eye and a very promising career in the WWF.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 11:27 AM

Is a street confrontation different than a sport match? Of course it is, but many skills from sport will transfer over to the street... especially the intensity. The closer the sport is to a street, the more that transfer will be.

Most guys who put down sports training while claiming a bunch of "street experience" usually don't have that street experience that they claim to have. There are a variety of examples of people who are supposed vicious real-life fighters folding quickly when things get real.

That being said, there are many things that are different and specific to real encounters. If one wants to do the best in real encounters as possible, he should make his training as specific as possible to those types of encounters.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 11:53 AM

That being said, there are many things that are different and specific to real encounters. If one wants to do the best in real encounters as possible, he should make his training as specific as possible to those types of encounters.

Now with this we are in agreement.

As to putting down Dan as a non WC practicianer I will stand by that view. While doubtless an excellent Martial Artist he is not a WC exponent. He is primarily a FMA person who has explored other arts and he is to be commended for that. But just like you would not expect a Football player to be able to teach Tennis just because someone has had some insight into an art does not mean they are an exponent of that art.

Since you want to hang onto Dan so much, answer the question about whether Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris, Jesse Glover and James Demille, who also trained with Bruce Lee should be considered Wing Chun exponents as well. If not what seperates them from Dan?

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 12:02 PM

As to putting down Dan as a non WC practicianer I will stand by that view.
How many times have you met him and how many times have you practiced WC with him?

Since you want to hang onto Dan so much, answer the question about whether Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris, Jesse Glover and James Demille, who also trained with Bruce Lee should be considered Wing Chun exponents as well. If not what seperates them from Dan?
I don't know them, so I have no idea whether or not they learned and practiced WC.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 12:05 PM

Since you want to hang onto Dan so much, answer the question about whether Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris, Jesse Glover and James Demille, who also trained with Bruce Lee should be considered Wing Chun exponents as well. If not what seperates them from Dan?

There's no doubt that "Bruce" knew WCK. He may not have known the whole curriculum, but he certainly knew -- and was very good at -- the fundamentals.

His Jun Fan Kung Fu is essentailly WCK. What he taught Demile and Glover was WCK, though Bruce asked them not to call it that. Demile used to even teach the SNT as part of WCD. Both Glover and Demile use chi sao as a teaching platform. Dan learned Jun Fan/WCK from Bruce. He's also trained WCK with others, notably Moy Yat and Hawkins. FWIW, I ahve done chi sao with Dan and he can play it much better than most.

Don't mistake the curriculum for the subject matter.

Bruce also coached several karate fighters in 60s. He wasn't teaching them WCK or Jun Fan but helping them to become better tournament fighters.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 12:15 PM

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;952252]His Jun Fan Kung Fu is essentailly WCK. What he taught Demile and Glover was WCK, though Bruce asked them not to call it that. Demile used to even teach the SNT as part of WCD. Both Glover and Demile use chi sao as a teaching platform. Dan learned Jun Fan/WCK from Bruce. He's also trained WCK with others, notably Moy Yat and Hawkins. FWIW, I ahve done chi sao with Dan and he can play it much better than most.[QUOTE]

Jesse Glovers approach to Chi Sau presents a very strong forward force. While he was sometimes criticized for using so much forward pressue it can present a problem for many WC people. However, Jesse makes it clear that what he does is not WC. I also like the training he developed with bicycle inner tubes.

James Demille did have a SNT but it was hardly the same as usually taught in WC and the focus was quite different. I do like some of the training methods he explored such as the inner tube on the wrists.

As to Dan, I met him once at a seminar years ago. I have never done Chi Sau with him and I am not knocking the man or his skill. I just do not agree that he is a Wing Chun person. Sure he may have been exposed to some WC but that does not mean he learned the system. Keep in mind that Bruce was developing his own approach to the MA's and incorporated many things into his training. Of course one builds upon ones base, in Bruces case that base was WC in Dans it was something else entirely.

Without knocking anyone, does anyone within the Wing Chun communitiy honestly consider Dan to be a representative of the system?

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 12:31 PM

Jesse Glovers approach to Chi Sau presents a very strong forward force. While he was sometimes criticized for using so much forward pressue it can present a problem for many WC people. However, Jesse makes it clear that what he does is not WC. I also like the training he developed with bicycle inner tubes.

If you ask Jesse why he doesn't call what he does WCK he'll tell you that it is because Bruce asked him not to (BTW, he was jsut here this past weekend in St. Louis holding a seminar).

James Demille did have a SNT but it was hardly the same as usually taught in WC and the focus was quite different. I do like some of the training methods he explored such as the inner tube on the wrists.

The SNT Demile taught was pretty much the same as all Yip Man people. Chris Chan, who learned from Yip Man, does his SNT with dynamic tension. Leung Ting does his completely relaxed. It doesn't really matter how you do it. Or if you do it at all.

As to Dan, I met him once at a seminar years ago. I have never done Chi Sau with him and I am not knocking the man or his skill. I just do not agree that he is a Wing Chun person. Sure he may have been exposed to some WC but that does not mean he learned the system. Keep in mind that Bruce was developing his own approach to the MA's and incorporated many things into his training. Of course one builds upon ones base, in Bruces case that base was WC in Dans it was something else entirely.

Without knocking anyone, does anyone within the Wing Chun communitiy honestly consider Dan to be a representative of the system?

Let's look at it a different way -- does Dan know how to box? Yes. He's trained with boxers. He's boxed. Is he a "representative of the system" of boxing? No. That's really not how things work. He can do it, he learned. Could he teach others boxing? Sure.

It's the same with WCK. He learned it. He can do it. He can teach it.

Now, with regard to his "understanding" of WCK, that like any other martial art, depends on his ability to really use his WCK. In that respect, he is certainly no worse than any of the big boys. ;) And probably much more likely to be able to use it.

sanjuro_ronin

08-05-2009, 12:33 PM

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 12:40 PM

At best Dan can be viewed as a representive of Jun Fun Kung Fu, I don't recall he ever mentioned WC outside of the context of jun Fun, but I only had a few seminars with him and they were more FMA based.
I don't think Dan has ever referred to himself as anything but a Jung Fun or JKD ot FMA or BJJ man, never as a WC man.

He probably ended up reaching the same conclusion I did.

Sihing73

08-05-2009, 12:42 PM

If you ask Jesse why he doesn't call what he does WCK he'll tell you that it is because Bruce asked him not to (BTW, he was jsut here this past weekend in St. Louis holding a seminar).

The SNT Demile taught was pretty much the same as all Yip Man people. Chris Chan, who learned from Yip Man, does his SNT with dynamic tension. Leung Ting does his completely relaxed. It doesn't really matter how you do it. Or if you do it at all.

Now, with regard to his "understanding" of WCK, that like any other martial art, depends on his ability to really use his WCK. In that respect, he is certainly no worse than any of the big boys. ;) And probably much more likely to be able to use it.

Spoke to Jesse about 6-7 years ago and we were trying to get something going with him in NY. Never panned out due to various reasons but I would enjoy meeting him. Although based on some of his videos and books I would not think of him as a WC guy. Could be wrong but just don't see it from what he has represented. The power punch for example among other things.

One of the things I was thinking as to the SNT was the use of Dynamic Tension. Don't know anything about Chris Chan so I won't comment. LT does stress relaxation and then power developement later.

Again without knocking Dan I am sure his application would be good, but I still believe it would not be WC per se. Rather I believe he would express "his WC" from a FMA basis. It's kind of like this; I do Wing Chun, that is my core and anything else I do I try to build upon that core. I also have done Pekiti Tirsia and worked with some people in that art. When we do the sticks there is a subtle difference in how I apply mine and theirs, this is due to my coming, or at least trying to come, from a WC perspective and core. Could I teach PT not at all, could I teach concepts of PT within my approach to WC sure could, that's where I'm coming from as regards this type of labeling, for lack of a better word.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 12:44 PM

At best Dan can be viewed as a representive of Jun Fun Kung Fu, I don't recall he ever mentioned WC outside of the context of jun Fun, but I only had a few seminars with him and they were more FMA based.
I don't think Dan has ever referred to himself as anything but a Jung Fun or JKD ot FMA or BJJ man, never as a WC man.

I think he always considered WC to be limited as a fighting method, although a part of the Jun Fan repetoire.

I doubt he would label himself as anything.

Ultimatewingchun

08-05-2009, 01:04 PM

As someone who has done both streetfighting and competitive fighting I can say this:
The argument is pointless.
While a streefight is more dangerous (potentially) it is NOT as testing as a competitive fight with a skilled opponent.
And while a competitive fight is far more testing, it is not more dangerous than an altercation on the street with some deranged fool with god knows what in his pocket and god knows what in his system.

Its not a case of either / or as to whom is the "real MA", you can't be a "real MA' without BOTH.

Its just that simple.
......................................

***Great post, Paul (sanjuro).

And I have to add the following: Because certain people (2 specifically) make the case that since streetfights are not filmed, it is therefore impossible to tell the skill level of someone that "A" may have fought on the street. So when "A" decides to discuss these encounters on a forum like this - there is no way for others to verify what "A" is saying. True enough.

Although it's quite possible that a high level of skill, courage, toughness, etc. is what saved "A" in a street encounter on any given day, those listening to the story that "A" tells don't know that.

So visual, verifiable evidence that one was fought, or sparred, or rolled with a "skilled, resisting opponent" is an important marker? When debating what works in fighting, ie.-wing chun techniques? And how skilled one is? And how efficient one's training methods are?

Again, true to all the above.

So why is it that one of the two people pooh-poohing street experience absolutely refuses to show the forum anything that can verifiy his claims to being "competently, realistically, and skillfully trained?" The same person that repeats himself over and over again on this forum about the importance of realism? And verification?

Does he not see that without such a visual marker, his claims to being "competently, realistically, and skillfully trained" are subject to same scepticism that he himself shows when "A" talks about street encounters?

The double standard just doesn't fly.

Ultimatewingchun

08-05-2009, 01:23 PM

goju

08-05-2009, 03:16 PM

Too funny that you think you are the only one who has ever mixed it up in the street against multiple opponents and weapons. Most of us "gym fighters" got into it precisely because of our street backgrounds.
actually most of you guys that talk about your street experience are full of **** like 99 percent of the losers who claim they are street fighters

goju

08-05-2009, 03:20 PM

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 04:14 PM

"Can you consistently get out of a headlock? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently escape the mount? And, can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Can you consistently deal with someone trying to knock your block off? And can you do it when your opponent is skilled and knows what he is doing? Etc. That's what it is about." (Terence Niehoff)
................................

***THIS could easily have been my post, talking about THE TOP 30, on a different thread. You know, some of the same exact kinds of scenarios that I listed as being important to be skilled in...
THAT TERENCE LABELED AS BEING "SILLY".

:rolleyes: :cool: ;)

I was using them as EXAMPLES of skill in action, not in some silly list of important moves -- your TOP 30 -- you should know. How do you develop skill in dealing with a headlock or dealing with athe mount? By learning to grapple, not learning just those "important moves". Those things come with overall grappling skill and no other way. If you actually spent some time getting real, qualified hands-on grappling instruction and rolling with good, skillful grapplers, you'd know that.

Yoshiyahu

08-05-2009, 07:36 PM

Ultimatewingchun

08-05-2009, 09:54 PM

I was using them as EXAMPLES of skill in action, not in some silly list of important moves -- your TOP 30 -- you should know. How do you develop skill in dealing with a headlock or dealing with the mount? By learning to grapple, not learning just those "important moves". Those things come with overall grappling skill and no other way. If you actually spent some time getting real, qualified hands-on grappling instruction and rolling with good, skillful grapplers, you'd know that.

***AND I'm calling the same "bull5hit" with you, my friend. Without any vids to prove it, I don't believe that you have spent enough time on the mat with good, skillful, qualified, grapplers either.

I think that most of your spiel is regurgitation of what others are saying and doing. You can talk all you want about how you've done (and continue to do) this or that - but I, for one, am not buying it as anything more than mostly talk - without the visual evidence.

grasshopper 2.0

08-05-2009, 11:23 PM

Who cares about what he can or can't do??? Its just a matter if u agree with him or not. If u do, then great and see how that point agrees with ur training. If you don't, then ignore him.

I don't see how his videos will help better ur wing chun? I mean, if its about having video evidence, then I guess most of us can't talk and u shouldn't be reading anyone's posts (with the few exceptions).

Seriously, if u guys are asking him to post vids because his tone is somewhat "degrading" then ur just ****y cuz ur feelings were hurt - and more importantly, is completely independent of whether he makes a point or doesn't.

Again, him posting a video doesn't make our/ur/my wing chun better - that's the bottom line.

Ultimatewingchun

08-05-2009, 11:34 PM

Frost

08-06-2009, 01:16 AM

Grasshopper, you have 69 posts on this forum, which probably means that you're new here...

while many of us have been reading his posts, watching him hijack thread after thread, make all sorts of claims about what actually will or won't work in a fight/match against a skilled, resisting opponent, including saying that wing chun is indeed his primary art - but yet he also says that hardly anything within wing chun actually works, or is useful - followed up by the claim that he, himself, is skilled and competent as a fighter due to all the training that he does with this group or that group on a regular basis; have listened to him insult virtually all wing chun people other than his own wing chun instructor (and some other people who trained under that instructor), and watched him call bull5hit on virtually everyone who disagrees with him about anything...for 5-6-7 years now, at least.

Well now I'm calling bull5hit. It's time for him to back up some of this bravado with real, verifiable, evidence that he can actually do what he talks about.

I have been on here for years before posting and whilst I admit I have not read all t_niehoff’s posts as I have a life and some of them can be very very long (I think he is a lawyer and if so this explains a lot) but his message seems to be that in order to be a good fighter you need to train the same way that successful fighters do, rather than do what he does.

I can’t ever remember him saying he is a great fighter and we should all copy his training but rather he puts the argument you need to emulate successful fighters not emulate him. So how does him posting a video make or break the argument?
If he posts one and he has useless skills does this mean he is wrong and you don’t need to train the way successful fighters do in order to become good?

Terrence seems to suggest you need to test your theories and skills against the best people you can find in a realistic environment, otherwise how do you know your skills actually work? That if you want to be able to beat a grappler, a Thai fighter etc then go find them and test yourself against them rather than just getting your students to try to fight the way you think a grappler would from watching DVDs and fights. His message seems to be test your theories and skills against actual competent trained fighters.
Do you think this argument is wrong, or is it the tone he uses rather than the message itself you take offence to?

I can understand people not liking the way he talks about wing chun and its training methods but surely the way to shut Terrance up is for people to show him the training methods they are using do work by posting clips of them being used in a competition or a real situation, present him with evidence that he can’t possibly ignore.

And before you say I am applying a double standard where you have to post clips and Terrance does not this is not what I am getting at. I am not saying you have to post clips of yourself to show the methods work, just as Terence need not post clips of himself to show his way of thinking is correct, any clips of anyone using the methods he or you are talking about will do. Surely this is the best way to shut him up and show him he is wrong?

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 01:37 AM

I don't think he's wrong about how important it is to consistently test ourselves against quality fighters who have skills that come from being trained in other martial arts, and especially including working against people we don't really know, because they are not part of our own particular school or training group.

And I reject his assertion that I, for one, don't do that. I have sparred and rolled against skilled, resisting people other than my own students and colleagues, and I continue to do so whenever I can. (Yes, I too have a life, am married, have other responsibilities, a house that needs upkeep, a full time non-martial art job, etc.)

But in addition to all that I listed about him in my last post, yeah, as you put it, I object most of all to the tone of his remarks. And to his arrogant assumption that, whatever he personally has not been able to do against skilled, resisting opponents with his wing chun skills - must also be true for every one else around here.

Now the interesting thing about him lately is that...yes...in the past he has consistently said that he, himself is not really that skilled as a fighter, but now...

after he's been pushed about showing the forum something visual, he now consistently says that HE IS COMPETENTLY SKILLED.

See the contradiction?

And then has the audacity to say that, though he really is competently skilled, why should he benefit us by showing us what he can do?

Yeah. Right.

Frost

08-06-2009, 02:07 AM

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 06:43 AM

So it really come down to a clash of personalities then? You broadly agree with his message, but not his tone?

If Terrence posts a clip of himself and he is seen by the majority to be not very skilled , do you think that will stop him posting in such a way? it won't prove him wrong on the key point you seem to disagree with him, mainly that wing chun as it is mostly taught does not allow someone to hang with a skilled fighter.
I would have thought a better way to get him to stop writing in such an arrogant way would be to show him he is wrong, if a few people put videos up of themselves using their wing chun skills successfully against skilled opponents outside their own gyms, this would prove him wrong and should stop him upsetting so many people.

Victor doesn't agree with my message at all. But, his problem (and you should know this from his posts on bullshido) is that he can't offer either evidence or reason to support his views or undermine mine, so all he can do is try to distract people from noticing that -- and he does that in this instance by calling for videos, etc.

You make the same point that I've made many times before -- that my views on training aren't based on my own personal development (that would be silly). Whether I am a monster or just ordinary has nothing to do with whether my views are sound and correct. I am not saying look to me as some example of what you can accomplish if you train properly. My views instead are based on what good, PROVEN fighters and fight trainers do and say -- if anyone is an authority, they are, and their results prove it. I keep saying to look to them, listen to them, etc. Look at what sport science has to say. Human beings are human beings, the evidence of how we best learn and develop athletic skills, including fighting skills, is readily available today to anyone who is sincere about training.

Some people may take my "tone" as arrogant. I'm not arrogant. When anyone goes and trains with good, skilled fighters, they will very quickly see that they're not that good. It is a very humbling experience. To me, the arrogant ones are those that believe they know, that they ahve the answers, yet have never gone and tested the validity of their views with good, proven fighters. For example, I think Victor is arrogant to think he has anything other than a very limited understanding of sub grappling since he has never received good, hand-on instruction and never put in any significant time rolling with quality opponents.

What people take as arrogance is my assurance that THEY are wrong in their views of training. My assurance is based on three things: (1) what they say is in opposition to what good PROVEN fighters and fight trainers say and do (not to mention sportscience), (2) my own experience working with good PROVEN fighters and fight trainers, and (3) that those people can't offer any solid evidence to support their views.

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 06:55 AM

"Victor doesn't agree with my message at all." (Terence)
..........................................

***NOT TRUE.

With nothing more really needed to be said, since all that follows this in his post is built upon a false foundation. I don't need Terence to tell me what proven fighters say and do, I need Terence to prove that he can do what he talks about, including showing me how wing chun is his primary art - even though he's so fond of saying that hardly anything in wing chun works.

Furthermore, Terence has no idea who I train with/roll with....he merely speculates.

And speculation is a key word here, since Terence's competent skills in anything have yet to be verified, here, on this forum, with visual evidence. And when one considers all that he says, that is indeed arrogance.

Wayfaring

08-06-2009, 07:01 AM

Victor doesn't agree with my message at all. But, his problem (and you should know this from his posts on bullshido) is that he can't offer either evidence or reason to support his views or undermine mine, so all he can do is try to distract people from noticing that -- and he does that in this instance by calling for videos, etc.

My take isn't that he doesn't agree with the message. Dedicated martial artists are continually evaluating and testing where they are really at. People's views are probably changing over the course of this forum.

You make the same point that I've made many times before -- that my views on training aren't based on my own personal development (that would be silly). Whether I am a monster or just ordinary has nothing to do with whether my views are sound and correct. I am not saying look to me as some example of what you can accomplish if you train properly. My views instead are based on what good, PROVEN fighters and fight trainers do and say -- if anyone is an authority, they are, and their results prove it. I keep saying to look to them, listen to them, etc. Look at what sport science has to say. Human beings are human beings, the evidence of how we best learn and develop athletic skills, including fighting skills, is readily available today to anyone who is sincere about training.

Of course your views are based upon your own personal development. The fact that you are modeling your development on quality fighters is good. However if you talked smack around quality fighters in the same fashion you do around here your word count and post count would likely go way down and your injury level would go way up.

I guess it's OK to talk smack to people who train TMA's in a fantasy based training method. But the rest of us are bored and want to see some video just for entertainment purposes.

Some people may take my "tone" as arrogant. I'm not arrogant. When anyone goes and trains with good, skilled fighters, they will very quickly see that they're not that good. It is a very humbling experience. To me, the arrogant ones are those that believe they know, that they ahve the answers, yet have never gone and tested the validity of their views with good, proven fighters. For example, I think Victor is arrogant to think he has anything other than a very limited understanding of sub grappling since he has never received good, hand-on instruction and never put in any significant time rolling with quality opponents.

No, you're the absolute epitomy of humility. That's why everyone wants to beat you like a rented mule or a red-headed step-child.

What people take as arrogance is my assurance that THEY are wrong in their views of training. My assurance is based on three things: (1) what they say is in opposition to what good PROVEN fighters and fight trainers say and do (not to mention sportscience), (2) my own experience working with good PROVEN fighters and fight trainers, and (3) that those people can't offer any solid evidence to support their views.
Yes what people take as arrogance is your assurance they are wrong in their views of training. Your assurance is mainly based upon your assumptions of how everyone else trains, or does not train. In person or on video it's easier to validate those assumptions. Over the internet, not so much. It just leads to sweeping generalizations.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 07:10 AM

"Victor doesn't agree with my message at all." (Terence)
..........................................

***NOT TRUE.

With nothing more needed to be said, since all that follows this in his post is built upon a false foundation. I don't need Terence to tell me what proven fighters say and do,

Yet, you don't listen to them!

I need Terence to prove that he can do what he talks about, including showing me how wing chun is his primary art - even though he's so fond of saying that hardly anything in wing chun works.

I don't know if you just aren't very bright or if you intend to misrepresent my views. I do not say and have not said that "hardly anything is wing chun works". I am saying that anyone's skill in applying the WCK tools will depend on HOW they train. And that they can't really know how they can make their WCK work if they aren't trying to actually make it work -- by sparring with skilled people. And, that the people who aren't doing that WORK (sparring with good people) often have common misconceptions (theory) about applying their WCK tools.

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 07:15 AM

You say it all the time, pal. All the time. Part of the Terence Niehoff message for years now is that very little wing chun actually works. Yet you tell us that wing chun is your primary art, and that you're competently skilled.

So show us what in wing chun actually does work - for you.

Not for someone else, for you.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 07:31 AM

Of course your views are based upon your own personal development. The fact that you are modeling your development on quality fighters is good. However if you talked smack around quality fighters in the same fashion you do around here your word count and post count would likely go way down and your injury level would go way up.

You're right that I model my training based on what good fighters do. But those views aren't BASED on my personal development -- it is based on THEIR development. For example, I am a low-to-intermediate level sub grappler. Is that the basis for my views on training? No. I listen to what proven, good sub grapplers say and do. They can help you walk the path. Guess who don't I listen to?

I guess it's OK to talk smack to people who train TMA's in a fantasy based training method. But the rest of us are bored and want to see some video just for entertainment purposes.

The problem with so much in TMAs is that it IS based on fantasy. And, you're probably right that I could be more diplomatic in my criticism. But, I get so tired of hearing the same fantasies, the same irrational beliefs, the same poor reasoning used to justify nonsense, etc. that I get caustic. I've been hearing this same crap for 25 years or so.

No, you're the absolute epitomy of humility. That's why everyone wants to beat you like a rented mule or a red-headed step-child.

LOL! All I can say is get in the queue. ;)

What is really behind this is that many people have huge ego-investments in their image of themselves (including their sifu, grandmaster, lineage, etc.) and they don't like that image being challenged.

Yes what people take as arrogance is your assurance they are wrong in their views of training. Your assurance is mainly based upon your assumptions of how everyone else trains, or does not train. In person or on video it's easier to validate those assumptions. Over the internet, not so much. It just leads to sweeping generalizations.

There is a basic TMA model of training, and most people in TMAs use that model. And -- as all the evidence shows -- that model is simply a very poor way to learn and train. If someone is not using that model, if they are training like good fighters train, then my views would not in any way annoy them. Do you think Dale or Alan or Hunter or Kenyon or etc. is upset by my views? No. Who gets upset? The people who don't agree with them, and those are the people who are not training like good, skilled fighters do.

If I say, for instance, that the only way to really become a good grappler is by getting good, hand-on instruction and then doing hundreds of hours of grappling with skilled opponents (something any good grappler is going to tell you), who gets upset? The people doing that or the people not doing that?

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 07:42 AM

You say it all the time, pal. All the time. Part of the Terence Niehoff message for years now is that very little wing chun actually works.

You're making that up. Why don't you cite one post of mine where I say that? One. You can't because you made it up.

Why are you making it up? That's called a strawman -- you make up something and present it as my view. That's not my view.

Yet you tell us that wing chun is your primary art, and that you're competently skilled.

So show us what in wing chun actually does work - for you.

Not for someone else, for you.

I'll be more than happy to show you when you come see me. You just don't get it -- you are not ENTITLED to anything from me. I don't owe you anything and I don't respond to demands. But, I'll do you a favor and show you in person. If it is that important to you, then do the work of visiting me. Make the effort. You want me to make the effort for you, to do the work for you, to present it on a platter for you. It's this simple: if you want to see what we do here, come here. I can't make it any plainer.

JPinAZ

08-06-2009, 08:18 AM

..that my views on training aren't based on my own personal development (that would be silly). Whether I am a monster or just ordinary has nothing to do with whether my views are sound and correct. I am not saying look to me as some example of what you can accomplish if you train properly. My views instead are based on what good, PROVEN fighters and fight trainers do and say...

You're right that I model my training based on what good fighters do. But those views aren't BASED on my personal development -- it is based on THEIR development. For example, I am a low-to-intermediate level sub grappler. Is that the basis for my views on training? No. I listen to what proven, good sub grapplers say and do. They can help you walk the path. Guess who don't I listen to?

With these statements, you are the worst example of what you preach here. You've just admited that you don't base any of your opinions on your own experience or results, which is really pathetic. You couldn't make your WC work, now you admit you can't make these other 'proven methods' work either.
You even say to look at them and not listen to you - so why are you even here? Without your own proof, you don't really know yourself. Now that is fantasy!

Here's the issue people have with you: If you can't even show what you preach works for you then STFU, cause you're just blowing hot air.

The problem with so much in TMAs is that it IS based on fantasy. And, you're probably right that I could be more diplomatic in my criticism. But, I get so tired of hearing the same fantasies, the same irrational beliefs, the same poor reasoning used to justify nonsense, etc. that I get caustic. I've been hearing this same crap for 25 years or so?

Haha, here comes Tattoo from Fantasy Island to preach about fantasy! You'd know best.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 08:26 AM

You're making that up. Why don't you cite one post of mine where I say that? One. You can't because you made it up.

perhaps you havent stated that quote exactly, but in the 9 months that i have been here i see you poo poo just about every WC method or tactic posted as fantasy and useless while propping up MT, boxing, et. al on a pedestal.

you even told yoshiyahu he had to train in MT first before training in WC

why dont you extend this offer to yoshi? he is in missouri and would be much easier.

im sure we will get a nice report. its hard to dislike someone when you meet them in person

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 08:43 AM

With these statements, you are the worst example of what you preach here. You've just admited that you don't base any of your opinions on your own experience or results, which is really pathetic.

I am talking about how to train to develop good fighting skills -- the model or approach I am talking about was not developed by me, nor is it my idea. I look to what has proved to work very well (what proven fighters and trainer use).

Of course I also use my own experience and results, but that is not the BASIS of my views.

Try to understand this -- I am training to go from point A to point B. That means I am presently at point A. How do I get to point B? I can't just use my own experience and results since they are confined to point A; I need to listen to people who are at point B or beyond or have taken others to point B. Can people who aren't at point B or haven't taken to people to point B help guide me there? No.

You couldn't make your WC work, now you admit you can't make these other 'proven methods' work wither.
You even say to look at them and not listen to you - so why are you even here? Without your own proof, you don't really know yourself. Now that is fantasy!

I never said that I couldn't make my WCK work. Stop making things up. Whether I can or not, however, won't help you or anyone else. We know how fighters train to fight. That's been proven to be the best way to train, the only way to train to get good, solid results. How good or bad I am doesn't change that fact. Does my skill level as a grappler, for instance, in any way alter the fact of how anyone must train to be a good grappler? No. Does training that way guarantee that someone will be great? Of course not. If so, everyone who boxed would be a great boxer and everyone who did BJJ would be anace grappler. But it is the only way to develop real skill.

Here's the issue people have with you: If you can't even show what you preach works for you then STFU, cause you're just blowing hot air.

And here's the issue I have with them -- the evidence of what it takes to develop good fighting skills, regardless of the art, is already out there (look at wehat good, proven fighters say and do) and doesn't depend on me or my personal performance level.

And, if you really believe what you are saying, why don't you apply it to your sifu and grandmaster? Did you require evidence of them being able to fight any skilled people before you accept what they had to say? ;) Next time your sifu tells you something ask him to show you it working against a low level MMA fighter or to stop blowing hot air.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 08:49 AM

perhaps you havent stated that quote exactly, but in the 9 months that i have been here i see you poo poo just about every WC method or tactic posted as fantasy and useless while propping up MT, boxing, et. al on a pedestal.

you even told yoshiyahu he had to train in MT first before training in WC

why dont you extend this offer to yoshi? he is in missouri and would be much easier.

im sure we will get a nice report. its hard to dislike someone when you meet them in person

I did extend this offer to him -- I told him that he could come train/spar with some of our group at a YMCA but that he either had to be a member of the Y or pay a $10 visitor fee. He didn't want to pay the fee. And, btw, I know things about him nd his group that you don't.

I extended a similar offer to you -- I said that if you tell me where you are located, I might be able to get someone to show you some of the things I was talking about. You said you weren't interested.

goju

08-06-2009, 10:42 AM

im in colorado id be glad to see what your talking about

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 11:05 AM

Knifefighter

08-06-2009, 11:12 AM

***This is some serious dishonesty of you part, Terence.

VERY DISHONEST.

Find the posts then.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 11:16 AM

"Part of the Terence Niehoff message for years now is that very little wing chun actually works." (Victor)
..............................................

AND TERENCE RESPONDS:

"You're making that up. Why don't you cite one post of mine where I say that? One. You can't because you made it up.

Why are you making it up? That's called a strawman -- you make up something and present it as my view. That's not my view."
...........................................

***This is some serious dishonesty of you part, Terence.

As pacman put it so well:

"perhaps you havent stated that quote exactly, but in the 9 months that i have been here i see you poo poo just about every WC method or tactic posted as fantasy and useless while propping up MT, boxing, et. al on a pedestal."
.........................................

***9 MONTHS ???!!! Well for many of us it's been a 5-6-7 years.

VERY DISHONEST.

Really? Have I said that what Alan has said or does won't work? I know what he does works. And it works because he is doing THE WORK -- he goes and trains with good, proven fighters and fight trainers to make it work. He trains like a fighter. There are others on this forum that are doing or have done the same thing. But you are right that I do point out a whole lot of nonsense and theory, and that's because 95% of what is posted here is nonsense and theory.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 11:21 AM

Find the posts then.

He can't because he is making it up. I have never said that WCK won't work. Victor is lying and accusing me of dishonesty! Classic.

Knifefighter

08-06-2009, 11:23 AM

He can't because he is making it up. I have never said that WCK won't work. Victor is lying and accusing me of dishonesty! Classic.
Yeah, he does have a history of doing that.

goju

08-06-2009, 11:30 AM

JPinAZ

08-06-2009, 11:34 AM

I am talking about how to train to develop good fighting skills -- the model or approach I am talking about was not developed by me, nor is it my idea. I look to what has proved to work very well (what proven fighters and trainer use).

Of course I also use my own experience and results, but that is not the BASIS of my views.

Try to understand this -- I am training to go from point A to point B. That means I am presently at point A. How do I get to point B? I can't just use my own experience and results since they are confined to point A; I need to listen to people who are at point B or beyond or have taken others to point B. Can people who aren't at point B or haven't taken to people to point B help guide me there? No

So, are you saying you've been stuck in Point A for 25+ years?? Why weren't your WCK sifus able to help you get to point B? What's so lacking in their WCK training methods that didn't work for you over the past 25 years? Boy, you sure were taken for a ride! :eek:

I never said that I couldn't make my WCK work. Stop making things up.

Oh really? Then why are you still looking to move past point A if you could make your WCK work? 25+ years, and still searching for point B?!?? Sounds like you should ask your past teachers for a full refund, you've been robbed. Or maybe you're just a bad student. So again, whcy should we be listening to you at all?

Whether I can or not, however, won't help you or anyone else. We know how fighters train to fight. That's been proven to be the best way to train, the only way to train to get good, solid results. How good or bad I am doesn't change that fact. Does my skill level as a grappler, for instance, in any way alter the fact of how anyone must train to be a good grappler? No. Does training that way guarantee that someone will be great? Of course not. If so, everyone who boxed would be a great boxer and everyone who did BJJ would be anace grappler. But it is the only way to develop real skill.

And here's the issue I have with them -- the evidence of what it takes to develop good fighting skills, regardless of the art, is already out there (look at wehat good, proven fighters say and do) and doesn't depend on me or my personal performance level.

And, if you really believe what you are saying, why don't you apply it to your sifu and grandmaster? Did you require evidence of them being able to fight any skilled people before you accept what they had to say? ;) Next time your sifu tells you something ask him to show you it working against a low level MMA fighter or to stop blowing hot air.

haha, I don't remember one person here asking for your help!
So, what if I told you I am a good fighter, and I use WCK training methods to get there? Without you having put in the work I have, would you believe me? Well, that's exactly what you are now saying - you haven't put in the work and haven't proven it to yourself (still stuck at point A for 25 years), yet you still act like you have all the answers. Where is your evidence? Ah yes, the MMA gods you nut-ride day in and day out here on the forums.

BTW, unlike you, I could fight pretty well before I met my sifu and he could still whip my a$$. And, unlike you, my skills have increased a lot since I've met him. While I have gotten a lot better and my skills have increased, he can still beat me. That's all the proof I need - that's my evidence.
All you have is being stuck at point A for 25 years and still searching.. Why not ask your sifu for some help? oops, I forgot, he says "go out there and make it work". Haha, how's that working out for you Tattoo? Good luck on Fantasy Island

JPinAZ

08-06-2009, 11:42 AM

Really? Have I said that what Alan has said or does won't work? I know what he does works. And it works because he is doing THE WORK -- he goes and trains with good, proven fighters and fight trainers to make it work. He trains like a fighter. There are others on this forum that are doing or have done the same thing. But you are right that I do point out a whole lot of nonsense and theory, and that's because 95% of what is posted here is nonsense and theory.

You can't possibly personally know what Alan is doing is working or not, because you haven't put in the work that he has. Quit riding on the efforts and hard work of others (nut hugging) while you continue to sit in the corner, it's really sad.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 11:53 AM

So, are you saying you've been stuck in Point A for 25+ years?? Why weren't your WCK sifu's able to help you get to point B? What's so lacking in their WCK training mthods that didn't work for you over the past 25 years?

When I made my comment about "I get so tired of hearing the same fantasies, the same irrational beliefs, the same poor reasoning used to justify nonsense, etc. that I get caustic. I've been hearing this same crap for 25 years or so" I was refering to stuff like this -- do you have such poor reading comprehension and reasoning skills that you really can't follow what I was saying?

Let me try to make it crystal for you. Your skill in WCK is your fighting skill. Fighting. That's your ability to use your WCK. OK? With me so far? You develop that ability by sparring with quality people, with good, skilled people. Follow? If you are at a certain level, (A) you get better by sparring with people who are better (at level B or higher) than you.

Oh really? Then why are you still looking to move past point A if you could make your WCK work? 25+ years, and still searching for point B?? Sounds like you should ask your past teachers for a full refund, you've been robbed. Or maybe you're just a bad student. Or, you just never will be able to make it work. So again, whcy should we be listening to you?

Seriously, are you an idiot?

I used point A in an example as just a marker for where any person is at in their development -- a certain point, you can call it A or X, it doesn't matter! I was not referring to me or to any specific point in development.

BTW, unlike you, I could fight pretty well before I met my sifu and he could still whip my a$$. And, unlike you, my skills have increased a lot since I've met him. While I have gotten a lot better and my skills ahve increaased, he can still beat me. That's all the proof I need - that's my evidence. All you have is being stuck at point A for 25 years and still searching.. Why not ask your sifu for some help?
oops, I forgot, he says "go out there and make it work". Haha, how's that working out for you?

You say that you are a good fighter, right? How do you know? You see, anyone can say that. And lots of people believe it. But that doesn't make it true. But it is a very easy thing to check out -- just go visit a place where good, PROVEN fighters train and mix it up.

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 11:58 AM

You can't possibly personally know what Alan is doing is working or not, because you haven't put in the work that he has. Quit riding on the efforts and hard work of others (nut hugging) while you continue to sit in the corner, it's really sad.

It's funny -- Victor lies and says that I maintain that WCK doesn't work, so then when I point to someone who is actually making his WCK work (and doing the very things I say we must do to make it work), then I'm nut hugging!

JPinAZ

08-06-2009, 12:07 PM

It's funny -- Victor lies and says that I maintain that WCK doesn't work, so then when I point to someone who is actually making his WCK work (and doing the very things I say we must do to make it work), then I'm nut hugging!

Yes, you are.
In case you forgot:

Have I said that what Alan has said or does won't work? I know what he does works.

And now read the bolded part really close. Remember, these are your words.

And it works because he is doing THE WORK -- he goes and trains with good, proven fighters and fight trainers to make it work. He trains like a fighter

Like I said, you can't prove it for yourself so you point to those you feel can make it work. Again - you can't make it work, so, you ride on the backs of your super heros' work and efforts.

My point was, you can't possible personally know if what alan does works or not, since you don't do what alan does - you aren't putting in the work he is. You can't make it work yourself. My point still stands
I'll repeat it again, since obviously you can't read: Quit riding on the efforts and hard work of others (nut hugging) while you continue to sit in the corner, it's really sad.

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 12:11 PM

goju

08-06-2009, 12:15 PM

i want to see evidence of you mixing it up with good proven fighters
who specifically that is a wel known proven fighter do you t rain with terrence? chuck liddel? cung le? frank shamrock?
who do tell me because im curious to know

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 12:24 PM

You're reasoning skills are atrocious. And that also explains why you holdmany of your other views.

Firstly, you don't know what I can or cannot do. You have absolutlely no idea. So anything you say about me or my skill is meaningless.

Secondly, Alan and his guys do train like a fighters. I know he trains with good MMA fighters and fight trainers, like Eddie Millis. He also trains with good BJJ fighters, etc. His results speak for themselves.

Thirdly, this is what I have said all good, proven fighters need to do to develop good skills. Alan is one example of that. To point out examples of people doing good training is not nut riding. It's called citing evidence. Try it sometime.

Fourthly, these views of mine aren't BASED on my performance level or my skill but based on what good, proven fighters and fight trainers do and say.

Fifthly, I don't use myself as an example since I don't want to be an example. I think people should consider what good, PROVEN fighters and fight trainers do and have to say, and not get sidetracked into what inevitably follows when anyone does try to be an example.

goju

08-06-2009, 12:42 PM

if you cant use yourself as an exaple then you have no ****in clue what your talking about your not speaking from experience therefore you dont know a **** thing

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 12:46 PM

It's not about Alan Orr, Terence, it's about you. You can't hide behind Alan or Dale or Matt Thornton forever. As JP has pointed out, you have been saying for years now that your wing chun was not functional. So you say that as a result, you have sought out and trained with other martial arts guys, ie.- MT guys, mma guys, boxers, BJJ, whatever.

BUT YOU ALSO NOW SAY THAT YOU'VE BEEN COMPETENTLY TRAINED AND THAT WING CHUN IS YOUR PRIMARY ART.

But you see, Terence, outside of maybe Dale and one or two others, nobody on this forum really believes you.

BECAUSE YOU, MR. LAWYER, HAVE PROVIDED NO EVIDENCE FOR US TO EXAMINE. YOUR WORDS ARE NOT EVIDENCE. NEITHER IS POINTING TO ALAN ORR EVIDENCE.

We just don't believe that your wing chun is functional and competent against skilled, resisting opponents.

Did you read this from my previous post?

I'll be more than happy to show you when you come see me. You just don't get it -- you are not ENTITLED to anything from me. I don't owe you anything and I don't respond to demands. But, I'll do you a favor and show you in person. If it is that important to you, then do the work of visiting me. Make the effort. You want me to make the effort for you, to do the work for you, to present it on a platter for you. It's this simple: if you want to see what we do here, come here. I can't make it any plainer.

Victor, I don't care what guys like you and Jonathan believe. I don't care if only one or two people consider my views. I can't make people see reality or think clearly. You're a guy who "trains" grappling by watching catch videos and then doing some "rolling"with your students but who lives in a town with several world-class grappling schools yet won't venture anywhere near them -- and then thinks he has a really good understanding of the ground, and who argues with a BJJ BB about grappling (a guy who would destroy you in seconds). You obviously live in your own little world.

This is a forum and I put my views out there for consideration. If people consider them or not, that's their perogative. The evidence supporting those views on training is out there and available for anyone to see. I tell people to go and see for themselves -- to go train/spar with good, skilled people. That and that alone will tell you the truth. YOU have to do it. Seeing me do it won't help you -- anymore than seeing Alan (who has videos out) do it hasn't helped you. YOU need to go do the work yourself, experience it yourself. You won't do that and you haven't. That's fine. Keep sparring with your students. Whatever you do, don't step outside your little pond.

BTW, Alan isn't evidence? Any people who have good, proven fighting skills is evidence. Don't you get that? It doesn't matter where the evidence comes from -- it still proves the point. Good fighters train like fighters -- and that means they go train with good, proven people.

sanjuro_ronin

08-06-2009, 12:55 PM

I think you guys might be missing Terrence's point, probably on purpose.
His point is that it is about what can be verified by what we can see and experience, not anecdotes and heresay,
He points out trained fighters because they have shown us what works, consistently.
He doesn't point to himself or any ONE individual because that would be meaningless, some people are great INSPITE of what they do, not because of it.
We must focus on what "everyman" can and does do.
That is his point.

And you guys know that.

That said, I don't see why T has never even posted a clip of ANYTHING...

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 01:04 PM

I think you guys might be missing Terrence's point, probably on purpose.
His point is that it is about what can be verified by what we can see and experience, not anecdotes and heresay,
He points out trained fighters because they have shown us what works, consistently.
He doesn't point to himself or any ONE individual because that would be meaningless, some people are great INSPITE of what they do, not because of it.
We must focus on what "everyman" can and does do.
That is his point.

And you guys know that.

No, they don't.

That said, I don't see why T has never even posted a clip of ANYTHING...

I haven't posted any videos since I don't have any. It's never been a priority of mine. I'm not a big video chronicler, and we don't sit around recording each other at traiing. But I may get around to it in the future.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 01:41 PM

His point is that it is about what can be verified by what we can see and experience, not anecdotes and heresay,

i dont think anyone misses that point. i think the issue here is that terrence pulls a rainman and keeps the above, even though we keep telling him that we are basing our conclusions on what we see an experience ourselves.

he needs to at least acknowledge what the other person says instead of dive into a soliloquy. at least call them a liar, and say why you think that. thats how you have a CONVERSATION.

when someone keeps talking as if you did not respond to his point, it crazy

does anyone here base their opinions on fantasy? please speak up if you do.

JPinAZ

08-06-2009, 01:47 PM

It’s real simple.
T trained WCK for what, 25+ years? He obviously became disillusioned with the results of this past training sometime in the not-so-distant past. This is clear to anyone reading his post for the past 4-5 years. And, it’s proven every time he says that traditional WCK training methods don’t work – obviously a self reflection of poor past performances. That is the only way he would know they work/don’t work – through personal experience. (IMO, I say he got robbed by his teachers)
So then he looks to others he feels ‘can’ fight. He looks at what he calls modern training methods of proven fighters to improve his game. Good for him. But has it even helped? He can’t say.

All this is ok. But he looks like an a$$ when he comes here and tells everyone that almost ALL traditional WCK training methods don’t work (based on his own weak results and what he sees on youtube). His world view is only limited to these 2 small basis of experience. Yet, now he’s found all the answers. And he doesn’t expect us to take his word for it, probably because he still can’t fight. He simply nutrides and says “don’t look at me, look at these guys and their results”.
He wants to tell everyone he’s found what does actually work, but still can’t point to any evidence that he’s even taken the time to prove it to himself. If he can’t do that, then he’s living on Fantasy Island and can’t be taken seriously.

Now he’s recently started saying his WCK actually does work! So now, these traditional training methods he wasted so much time in actually do work (?) Which is it?
He’s also said chi sau doesn’t train someone for fighting. Then it does, then it doesn’t again. The guy’s all over the yard.

Bottom line, he comes here and says all this yang, and then repeatedly says that none of it is even based on his own personal experiences! Where did he get it from? Watching others! Hahahahah. He talks about results, but where are his? If he can’t even say he’s proven to himself what does really work and can only point to the hard work, sweat, blood and tears of others, he should STFU.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 02:37 PM

Let me try to make it crystal for you. Your skill in WCK is your fighting skill. Fighting. That's your ability to use your WCK. OK? With me so far? You develop that ability by sparring with quality people, with good, skilled people. Follow? If you are at a certain level, (A) you get better by sparring with people who are better (at level B or higher) than you.

this is really getting sad. you are arguing with a ghost. you are talking through people and not talking to them

WHO THE HELL ON THIS FORUM DISPUTES THE ABOVE? NO ONE?

this is not the issue at hand

Firstly, you don't know what I can or cannot do. You have absolutlely no idea. So anything you say about me or my skill is meaningless.

my god. "Hey Kettle. This is Pot. You're black."

Knifefighter

08-06-2009, 02:47 PM

honestly terrence you come off as some mma nerd who dosnt even practice mma as it is but bad mouths tma because like all the other puds who are glued to every ufc match think they are authorities on martial arts
your grasp of wing chun like knife fighter is worth f^ck all but you continually talk about a subject you dont know about
You trained WC for what, a year? With someone who learned from someone else, neither of which anyone in the WC world has heard about? Yeah, you really know what's up.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 02:49 PM

You trained WC for what, a year? With someone who learned from someone else, neither of which anyone in the WC world has heard about? Yeah, you really know what's up.

both you and terrence are so submissive to authority figures, huh

if its not in UFC its crap. if you dont learn from some mainstream dude its crap.

sheesh. how weak.

Ultimatewingchun

08-06-2009, 03:00 PM

I'm just so tired of all this. Period. Terence says that he may get around to making a vid or two, fine...I'll wait for that. In the meantime, I don't see any point in debating anything with the guy. He can't have it both ways. If he wants to hold everyone around here to certain standards that he thinks we have to show proof of...then he has to do the same thing.

It's amazing after reading his latest posts to see how p i s s e d off he is that he's now being called out to prove something with a vid. The very same kind of evidence he always demands to see every time he decides to call bull5hit on someone.

Arrogance with a CAPITAL A.

Enough of this guy.

Knifefighter

08-06-2009, 03:04 PM

both you and terrence are so submissive to authority figures, huh

if its not in UFC its crap. if you dont learn from some mainstream dude its crap.

sheesh. how weak.

What does UFC have to do with it? The UFC is just one single venue where people are fighting full out against resisting opponents.

And, no, it doesn't have to be mainstream. But there does need to be some consistent evidence of it being able to be done the way you say it is supposed to be done.

The Dog Bros are not mainstream, but they are fighting full out.They don't stand behind bullsh!t theory. If you see it taught, you will see it fought... something the majority of people who post here don't seem to understand.

Yoshiyahu

08-06-2009, 03:10 PM

What does UFC have to do with it? The UFC is just one single venue where people are fighting full out against resisting opponents.

And, no, it doesn't have to be mainstream. But there does need to be some consistent evidence of it being able to be done the way you say it is supposed to be done.

The Dog Bros are not mainstream, but they are fighting full out.They don't stand behind bullsh!t theory. If you see it taught, you will see it fought... something the majority of people who post here don't seem to understand.

So true. I believe it would be a great service if a striking style was to step up and make their Art phenomal by defeating numerous Grapplers and BJJist. But I don't think that will happen. Many Kung Fu people who claim to have skills are so darn secreative. Like their art is super deadly and can't be shown. They like to hide their skills. Instead of fighting others!

Pacman

08-06-2009, 04:18 PM

And, no, it doesn't have to be mainstream. But there does need to be some consistent evidence of it being able to be done the way you say it is supposed to be done.

what does having consistent evidence have to do with learning from an "unknown".

these are two different issues. if you do not respond i will assume you know what you said was ridiculous.

Knifefighter

08-06-2009, 04:24 PM

what does having consistent evidence have to do with learning from an "unknown".

these are two different issues. if you do not respond i will assume you know what you said was ridiculous.

Because WC has not been around that long... not to mention the fact the WC people are notorious lineage trackers. If no one has ever heard of him, the chances are he's making his background up. Lots of people do that.

Even more important is the fact that you only trained for a year. You can't gain much knowledge in a year.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 05:33 PM

Because WC has not been around that long... not to mention the fact the WC people are notorious lineage trackers. If no one has ever heard of him, the chances are he's making his background up. Lots of people do that.

Even more important is the fact that you only trained for a year. You can't gain much knowledge in a year.

so when its convenient you go from "lineage is stupid" and "use whatever works" to being a lineage groupy?

who said i only trained for a year? i trained under him for a few years. when i have time, i visit and continue my training under him.

and as im sure you, being a great fighter, should know that the # of years is no guarantee to skill or understanding. so even if terrence has 25 years it doesnt guarantee anything.

besides, im not justifying my opinions with lineage or the # of years. i just want to discuss the issues. is that so difficult?

Yoshiyahu

08-06-2009, 05:48 PM

so when its convenient you go from "lineage is stupid" and "use whatever works" to being a lineage groupy?

who said i only trained for a year? i trained under him for a few years. when i have time, i visit and continue my training under him.

and as im sure you, being a great fighter, should know that the # of years is no guarantee to skill or understanding. so even if terrence has 25 years it doesnt guarantee anything.

besides, im not justifying my opinions with lineage or the # of years. i just want to discuss the issues. is that so difficult?

So what are the issues???

goju

08-06-2009, 06:04 PM

You trained WC for what, a year? With someone who learned from someone else, neither of which anyone in the WC world has heard about? Yeah, you really know what's up.
lol no this is calling the kettle black
your a bum fighter no one knows who you are because your fights werent anything great end of story
your excused son

goju

08-06-2009, 06:04 PM

both you and terrence are so submissive to authority figures, huh

if its not in UFC its crap. if you dont learn from some mainstream dude its crap.

sheesh. how weak.
dale never fought in the ufc did he ? he wasnt good enough lol

goju

08-06-2009, 06:07 PM

goju

08-06-2009, 06:22 PM

i just find it amusing that and old short **** that no one has ever heard of walks around the wing chun forum like hes a big shot
from the description of your videos of you fighting you were a good grappler with so so stand up
well woopdee ****in do mate
lol i think the only reason you fought the dubious matches you did was so you could run around on the internet acting like a know it all dale
your a nobody end of story just another generic fighter whos career slipped through the crack because he wasnt good enough

Sihing73

08-06-2009, 06:39 PM

Hello,

OK, everyone has had a chance to give thier say and POV. Even me, although we all know I am full of it and live in a fantasy world. I rather like it in my own little world with nice, toned female ninjas giving me my just deserts......er never mind let me keep that to myself.

Anyhow, everyone knows where everyone stands, or at least ought to by now.

No need to drop anymore insults at one another.

For the record, while I may not agree with everything T or KF says, I do respect their right to their own opinions. What I do get a bit tired of is the same old tirade over and over again. I also think it is unfair to discount others experience just because it does not fit into a pre-determined mold. It seems that if ones opinion is opposite then the poster is full of it, no way could they have such an experience contrary to some peoples opinion.

However I do give props to both for at least putting thier views out there and standing by them. I also, dare I say it, also feel Dale deserves respect for putting it on the line and sparring no matter who it was with nor how good they may or may not have been. Plus by all accounts he is in good shape physically, so no matter whether he is living the GYM Fantasy :) all in fun Dale, or not at least he is sticking to his beliefs.

Oh, well let's put this to bed and move on to actual topics related to the art of Wing Chun.

Closing this thread and going back to my basement bedroom and posting online with my fake stats.............oh never mind I'll just lurk around here instead.

Although my final little bit of sadness is that it is so hard to find an attractive, unattached woman Wing Chunner......anyone who knows of any please PM me NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, except you Phil as one of my country songs says "around here we like the girls who sing soprano" and I prefer not to comment on your taste in women :D