Feints [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

k gledhill

08-01-2009, 09:50 AM

Feinting is actually a HUGE part of the WSL training...it gives us the reasons for not seeking hands with hands :D rather striking with arm angles that can intersect lines if they are THERE OR SUDDENLY NOT THERE...thoughtless to contact being made or not ...they are taught to focus on striking to the target ...letting the arms do their own responses from chi-sao training if they are stopped etc...
It can be a easy coaching method to get a beginner to focus on the 2 fold strikes job...hit the target and cover the strike line as it gets within distances of working ...
When an arm is extended by me to the student , they [many ;)] tend to see it as the
object of their focus ...a hand / arm ! must contact :D...must use fancy moves !
NOT.

The 2 attacking techniques to a closed strike line JUT & PAK ....from a leading strike nearest the target relative to the arms angle/flank/movement relative to your strike lines positions ...

Jut , whether it juts or not stays on the strike line , rather than a lop that takes us off line grabbing laterally. Jut goes back and forth along the line ...miss you just keep firing.
by adopting X'ing blindside , flanks etc..the strikes will intersect POTENTIAL use of this.

Pak moves to the centerline but doesnt x it ...and strikes out from the line, parry or not. the control point is the elbow not the wrist, so you dont wave the wrist across the line with no elbow alignment control to the following strike etc..

Doing a simple xercise can show the student the impact and deflection of the strikes tan & jum as they try to both deflect my strike to them as they strike to me from an angle, say 45 deg. for a number...no precise #...

they are to either side of me ...not infront...they will learn the distance they need to be and angles to both strike me and deflect me with their forearm positions...either tan strike or jum ..depending how close that arm is to the intended target...one leads the other is in the rear...not 2 hands extended together across one arm...except for po-pai

they strike trying to keep both elbow in while striking my chest as a target they can impact with force...as they do the 1 st punch I punch to their line just to intercept their elbows position...usually it will come out and we either trade punches or they come offline and I hit them gently to show the elbow is out and they didnt hit me...
2 then they overconcentrate on the next attempt and elbow stays in but they dont strike ...then they strike again but forget the elbow ,...back to #1 response :D

then they get told to focus on the chest as the target AND keep elbows in they start to get the idea now...my arm is deflected offline as they strike me and defelct me...

To PROVE the exercise I ask the students to throw feints as well as counter strikes to check for overzealous arm chasing ...when they get caught their stance and intent can be seen to waver and there is no impact force because their minds focus where on the arm ...too much chi-sao with no impact defelection focus leads to this ....

dan chi introduces the 2 actions per strike tan strikes forwards while also generating lateral deflection forces ..2 lines of energy 1 strike
jum has the same 2 actions but strike with inward energy to keep a strike from countering or entering your line as you strike...
The focus is to make the initial positions tan elbow in jum elbow in the starting point and the recovery point for the following strikes in a fight ...

adopting tactical angles while facing and being able to use the square on ability of SLT to reach equally with2 strikes across angled positions , relative to the fight in progress...we strike without thinking about thew elbows...because we did that in training.

We can also feint when sparring by simply [for terence] removing our arms from the contact zone completely....as the student approaches you with strikes you take your arms away and see if they are attacking you or your arms...you can fight by simply not being where they are going ..subtle shifts offer arms ...take them away...leave them to check striking angles , facing ...attacking intent....step away sideways, backwards etc..randomly to see if they persist to attack or stop n watch :D

feinting is a great introduction to fighting along YOUR strike line focusing on the head/body line etc...

Developing sticky controlling wrist chi-sao will never produce this type of fighter....they will always seek an arm to control / trap etc...rather than have developed the strikes with 2 actions ...

a strike with 2 actions is acting as 2 handed attack ...the forearms become the hands the fist is striking in ...

Pak sao becomes the WHOLE inside or outside of your arm rather than the palm alone...think lateral force coupled with straight linear line

then combine the 2 arms capable of using this double energy as a facing shifting angling attack that can ALSO become a lead jut to an arm that stops and wont allow a deflection from a lead strike ...a pak sao that can clear a line that you cant simply strike through...etc...

The chi-sao takes on a platform of further developing this arm strike duality of energy ..never over sticking or doing more than one defensive action per response...trying to develop strikes for each other that can deflect as they strike or hold the line and negate
each others strikes in the center ....then the stepping and countering is introduced to add angling and facing the anglers movements ...all relative to the strikes ability , relative to your particular angle to them...

the resulting stance , balance , ability to strike with sufficient stopping force AND deflection angles are tested by adding feints too...all the time we allow a shot to show that even IF WE LET YOU HIT US CAN YOU EVEN HURT US AND STOP YOURSELF FROM BEING HIT IN THE SAME ACTION ? at close range repeatedly under pressure and with the added random entry from either side of an attacker or your counter ?

The system opens up as a systematic development of this idea from the very begining to the end...

The idea of front and center controlling etc....becomes redundant ..your development wont give you the strike ability...angling striking shifting striking , clearing thoughtlessly with arm in rotation...rather you want to lop n chop , pak trap and hit with no idea of a single arm that can act as BOTH yours ...:D

Its so simple but overlooked for sticky stuff or 3 move counters to an arm in the air.

It is a humbling experience to add feinting to guys who have done YEARS of sticky stuff...they havent got a clue about using an arm in close quarter fighting as a strike and deflection...they will always rely on their lead as a controlling action...

making the fight EQUAL both of you have an arm free and one engaged by grabbing etc....

if you develop the ability to have a simple strike act also as a parry , depending on given arm angles
/positions ....then you are developing the ability to deliver an attack for 9 out of 10 seconds

attacking is a science

grasshopper 2.0

08-01-2009, 01:25 PM

yes, i agree! Feinting/fakes/etc are exposed right away in the lat sao programs. Gives the student some idea. Of course, feinting off no contact whatsoever should also be exposed too...knowing when to close in or not. To me, it's really hard and still needs lots of fine tuning.

k gledhill

08-01-2009, 08:47 PM

oddly quiet on the T front ....:D

t_niehoff

08-02-2009, 07:26 AM

oddly quiet on the T front ....:D

Well, I wasn't particularly interested in the thread.

k gledhill

08-02-2009, 08:20 AM

not surprising ...;)

t_niehoff

08-02-2009, 09:11 AM

not surprising ...;)

You find it surprising that I'm not interested in theory?

k gledhill

08-02-2009, 04:54 PM

Its not theory :D

Lee Chiang Po

08-02-2009, 08:47 PM

Fainting and faking are just a few methods of distraction. It works well for entry into an attack, and for getting you in close enough to gain control of an opponent. I am not sure what is meant by chasing hands, but a faint or fake strike can be like asking for a hand, and when the opponent gives it to you in an effort to block the blow, you take possession of it. Also, if he is preparing to attack you, a good fake will often stop that attack and put him on defensive against an attack that is not there. Then before he can recover you take advantage of him. There are tons of ways to faint and fake out an opponent. I would think it an important part of any style of gung fu.

HumbleWCGuy

08-02-2009, 10:44 PM

Yeah,
I teach 4 standard feinting serieses which consists of about 15 or so techniques. In addition, I try to give some explanation to my students as to how and why these things work.

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 05:42 AM

Feinting in training is used as a tool to mke the student focus on the target not the arm in the way of the target...
1st you have to be developing the striking lines along your centerline that both deflect entry to your center and strike forwards along the line , simultaneously.

Each arm has to have the capacity to strike using the outside edge and the inside edge of the arm...we use the low elbows , held inward as the SLT teaches .

as we progress to show the fighting aspect of using these strikes, we need to show that the intent of the VT fighter is to engage the fight without thought for being overly defensive and chase hands to stick or control, rather than allow the initial striking ideas to work.
To show good elbow / fist alignment strikes I/we use feints as a tool to show that the strikes are focused on the space of air in front of the target , rather than striking into the target ...so as the student sstrikes from angles and perimeter positions dictated by my position and arm used to strike..ie Jab or a cross....I suddenly remove the jab or the x to
see if the student keeps the strike line regardless of my actions, like putting a blank chamber in a gun during target practice, to see if the shooter is 'anticipating the 'bang/recoil' ....

It is a primary tool to avoid the sticking idea and over controlling the lead arm of the opponent.

Same in chi-sao, I can suddenly drop my bong sao from the space it occupies and show that the student is trying to strike my arm 1st not my head 1st....using their forearms to occupy my bongs position as a deflection ...coupled WITH their striking arm...

Same with sparring ..it carries over to simple removal [ blank] of my arms as the student advances into me to attack from whatever given angle is used...if they are focused primarily on my arms as the lead , I can remove them and the students balance , timing and intent are shown to be incorrectly aimed at my arms using their hands OFFLINE ...

OFFLINE movement from the centerline strike path along with flanking is shown by feinting and or simple removal of 'ARM BAIT' ...deliberately placing an arm in the way of an attack only to remove it the instant contact is about to be made...

Dan chi-sao introduces the feinting of each partner to show and prove the focus of the strikes and alignment rather than a redundant sticking , rolling to and fro action using wrists to deflect.....using the wrists as many do to block a tan strike , makes you drop your strike from the lead , rather than use the elbow to occupy the center entry area to your own line ....and be able to strike while using elbows/forearms etc...in a naturally displacing position....

Add angling of the strikes relative to the attempts of the oppponent to face you and they can 'cut' into available angles AS the opponents strikes come at you...we can strike with each arm creating natural barriers that STRIKE the STRIKES with counter angling , and body shifting to both be evasive while striking in distances close to the opponent ...yet not square on as chi-sao with 2 arms extended doing a redundant drill...

Shifting , striking , angling , relentlessly, in close proximity ...using the tactical directions of the knives to avoid being centere to an equally armed opponent .

water fight analogy....avoid the line of water being thrown BUT throw water back :D

The system takes on a more fluid relentless pressure attack that shifts and sticks to a fight like a shadow...flowing torrent of water attack...

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 06:36 AM

Its not theory :D

Sure it is.

But, I'll give you my experience with regard to feints.

Generally, in fighting you won't have the opportunity to or need to use feints. To understand why, you need to know what feints are for -- their tactical significance: they are used to create offensive openings. That presupposes two things: firstly, that you have the time to do that; and secondly, that your opponent is sufficiently skilled to not have any openings (so that you need to create some). Most fights, including "streetfights", that you encounter won't provide those two preconditions. In most fights, including streetfights, your opponent will be highly aggressive, and throwing relentless attacks so you won't have the time to feint (look at some youtube fights or some 'toughman competitions' for examples of what I mean). Nor if you do will they have any effect -- unskilled, aggressive fighters won't react but simply keep coming at you and attacking. And unskilled or poorly skilled fighters, particularly highly aggressive ones, have all kinds of holes so there is no need to set up your offensive action with feints.

Typically, feinting has not been a part of the WCK curriculum-- it's not in the forms, the drills, talked about in the kuit, etc. And, that's because feints are not a big part of an inside game, and even less a part of an attached game. Feints mainly play a part on the outside, and then only when facing well-skilled fighters.

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 06:51 AM

Wrong thinking Terence, you will see one day ...time will tell...
Meanwhile how does your inside idea carry down from the knives, sparring with knives and sparring with bare hands ? do you adopt a different mind set to how to move for them :D Id love to see your movements switch from one to the other thoughtlessly ..."inside er ah no outside er flank uh which side ...why ...doh ! :D:D:D

Pacman

08-03-2009, 07:00 AM

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 07:03 AM

Sure it is.

But, I'll give you my experience with regard to feints.

Generally, in fighting you won't have the opportunity to or need to use feints. To understand why, you need to know what feints are for -- their tactical significance: they are used to create offensive openings. That presupposes two things: firstly, that you have the time to do that; and secondly, that your opponent is sufficiently skilled to not have any openings (so that you need to create some). Most fights, including "streetfights", that you encounter won't provide those two preconditions. In most fights, including streetfights, your opponent will be highly aggressive, and throwing relentless attacks so you won't have the time to feint (look at some youtube fights or some 'toughman competitions' for examples of what I mean). Nor if you do will they have any effect -- unskilled, aggressive fighters won't react but simply keep coming at you and attacking. And unskilled or poorly skilled fighters, particularly highly aggressive ones, have all kinds of holes so there is no need to set up your offensive action with feints.

Typically, feinting has not been a part of the WCK curriculum-- it's not in the forms, the drills, talked about in the kuit, etc. And, that's because feints are not a big part of an inside game, and even less a part of an attached game. Feints mainly play a part on the outside, and then only when facing well-skilled fighters.

You dont understand the system being developed and the reason for 'feints', the word feints can be misleading , implying I deliberately fight you with feints like a boxing match. Wrong .

Its a training tool to maintain students from developing sticky wristing ideas...we develop strikes that also deflect each others strikes in drills...your tan versus my jum
my tan is only in my centerline for you benefit ...inside gate for the drill to train my tan to displace energy along its relative path ..to my strike line/ centerline...wed ont stand and trade strikes like this in fighting.
We usew Chum kil to move before an opponent and strike them...we turn only to face the direction they are at angles to us...we dont do a facing chi-sao posture with 2 hands in a basic stance trying to 'chase,control, stick'.

removing an arm from your intent to stick to it is not a feint in the fighting sense, its a method to put your focus primarily on striking the guy...using the arm angles relative to yours etc...later whole body angle etc...systematic training of a simple idea....
In chi-sao we can do this arm removal by simply dropping the arm away so you can strike me in training ...to develop impact to open lines , randomly presented to you.

adding stepping attack entry from either side, creating your ability to instinctively shift and angle accordingly to a given line of force coming at you, same as knives ...to avoid being in the middle of two arms working on you...rather we try to avoid this scenario.

Many arent made aware of this thinking because they didnt have the knives/tactics taught to them early enough to integrate the ideas to the beginners...

like learning the dummy 10 years after the SLT...we need a complete package of the system ...or you get a fragmented version of sticky crap with centerline blasts lead leg down the middle ..

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 07:14 AM

i think what you said in general is true about aggressive unskilled fighters--some/most/ a lot of them they will come at you with a barrage of attacks without any technique. doing a feint while they are swinging at you in a frenzy probably won't do anything--they wont even notice.

but it would work when, like you said, they are on the outside...and most fights start from the outside

unskilled fighters are also going to the most uptight and tense, so feints on them would actually create the biggest reaction too.

That's your belief -- I was speaking from experience. Go try it, and see for yourself. My experience is that when you fight/spar with aggressive, unskilled or poorly skilled guys when you make a move, including a feint, they don't react defensively but attack on your movement (sort of a like a wild west gunfight, when they see you go for your gun they go for theirs).

so i dont think its safe to conclude that feints will not work in a real combat situation.

Feints are like any other tool/tactic. You need to learn when -- the proper tactical context -- to use them. You learn that BY FIGHTING, by seeing for yourself when they work, when they don't, etc. Everything else is theory, is guesswork. I've shared my observations from my experience fighting/sparring.

also, i disagree with the assertion that WC has no feints

WC is a set of ideas and movements. how you apply them is often up to you--as long as you do not violate other WC principles in doing so. there is nothing in WC against the use of feints.

I said that feints are not a part of the WCK curriculum. How you use your WCK is up to you.

also, i disagree with your suggestion that WC has no outside game. i think people often think this because many sifus place so much focus on sticky hands from the start, that they never teach how to fight from the outside and then apply sticky hands after penetrating to the close range

WCK's method is to control while striking. The curriculum provides the tools to go from the outside to attached fighting. But, WCK's curriculum doesn't provide you with the tools to stay on the outside and fight. And that's why all the WCK people who do fight from the outside end up looking like kickboxers.

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 07:21 AM

"WCK's method is to control while striking. The curriculum provides the tools to go from the outside to attached fighting. But, WCK's curriculum doesn't provide you with the tools to stay on the outside and fight. And that's why all the WCK people who do fight from the outside end up looking like kickboxers."

tsk tsk :D the whole system design is for this ....you dont see it so you have no alternative ...you havent been shown a working flank attacking flow.. so you assume it doesnt exist.. your functionality is from controlling actions front and center because ....?

you havent been made aware of it ...yet :D:D:D lmao...I can hear it now.."how come I never had the system explained like this before ?" everyone who has it shown says the same thing....

tan becomes a strike, jum as well..it all becomes ways to maintain an attacking hand...
not sticking to hands.

each side we fight from is capable of shutting down the opponents flank ...all we do is point and shoot thoughtlessly....attacking for a longer period than we are attacked...percentages for a fight go up... because every action or actions involves an attacking action...we dont over stick or try to do 2 consecutive defensive actions because we lose the impetus of the fights....

its really simple stuff too, no secrets...because we share a common language , we tend to associate a name to "our" understanding of it...this is from anothers "understanding " etc....

when you drink water you always think of the source...

how many cups of water did it take for you to have a drink....? is it flavored water, a little extra to make it function ?

...?

Pacman

08-03-2009, 07:23 AM

That's your belief -- I was speaking from experience. Go try it, and see for yourself. My experience is that when you fight/spar with aggressive, unskilled or poorly skilled guys when you make a move, including a feint, they don't react defensively but attack on your movement (sort of a like a wild west gunfight, when they see you go for your gun they go for theirs).

again...every time someone disagrees with you they are not speaking from experience. it never gets old

my experience is that it is much easier to fake out unexperienced fighters. not saying that its a silver bullet and will work on everyone. im sure there are fighters who are so focused on taking your head off that they don't notice anything around them.

Feints are like any other tool/tactic. You need to learn when -- the proper tactical context -- to use them. You learn that BY FIGHTING, by seeing for yourself when they work, when they don't, etc. Everything else is theory, is guesswork. I've shared my observations from my experience fighting/sparring.

thats fantastic. is it possible that someone else could also have experiences and draw different conclusions from them? just maybe possible?

the only way you woldnt think this is possible is if you think you got it all figured out. do you realize why we have this impression of you now?

I said that feints are not a part of the WCK curriculum. How you use your WCK is up to you.

ok. it sounded like you were inferring that feints are not supposed to be used with WC because you think that WC has no outside game

WCK's method is to control while striking. The curriculum provides the tools to go from the outside to attached fighting. But, WCK's curriculum doesn't provide you with the tools to stay on the outside and fight. And that's why all the WCK people who do fight from the outside end up looking like kickboxers.

i believe WCK does have to tools to stay on the outside and fight if you wanted to. its just that the focus is to get on the inside because thats how WC believe they can have an advantage. what WC person have you seen fight that looks like a kicboxer?

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 07:30 AM

"WCK's method is to control while striking. The curriculum provides the tools to go from the outside to attached fighting. But, WCK's curriculum doesn't provide you with the tools to stay on the outside and fight. And that's why all the WCK people who do fight from the outside end up looking like kickboxers."

tsk tsk :D the whole system design is for this ....you dont see it so you have no alternative ...you havent been shown a working flank attacking flow.. so you assume it doesnt exist.. your functionality is from controlling actions front and center because ....?

you havent been made aware of it ...yet :D:D:D lmao...I can hear it now.."how come I never had the system explained like this before ?" everyone who has it shown says the same thing....

tan becomes a strike, jum as well..it all becomes ways to maintain an attacking hand...
not sticking to hands.

each side we fight from is capable of shutting down the opponents flank ...

This is all theory, how you imagine things will work in fighting. But anyone who has accumulated a decent amount of quality sparring/fighting will immediately recognize that it is nonsense.

Not only that, you don't understand what I am saying -- to control while striking does not mean I will necessarily be "front and center", I can control from the flank too. Moreover, if you don't control the opponent once you get the flank, your opponent will immediately take the flank away from you by facing you, not to mention that I doubt very strongly that you will even be able to get the flank without controlling your opponent.

Tan and jum are actions, not means to "stick" to an opponent's hands.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 07:37 AM

honestly if you are going to continue to be condescending, continually saying "if you fought competent fighters you would know..." is getting old.

at least come up with some new material

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 07:39 AM

again...every time someone disagrees with you they are not speaking from experience. it never gets old

my experience is that it is much easier to fake out unexperienced fighters. not saying that its a silver bullet and will work on everyone. im sure there are fighters who are so focused on taking your head off that they don't notice anything around them.

Look, you wrote that "you thought" not that you were reporting your experience. If you want to speak from experience, then say so -- don't assume I can read your mind.

What happens if you feint and he doesn't react but runs over you? Is the feint worth that risk?

thats fantastic. is it possible that someone else could also have experiences and draw different conclusions from them? just maybe possible?

the only way you woldnt think this is possible is if you think you got it all figured out. do you realize why we have this impression of you now?

People can have different experiences and draw different conclusions. I am just stating what mine are. Go look at some clips of 'toughman competitions' on youtube and ask yourself whether or not feints would be a good idea.

ok. it sounded like you were inferring that feints are not supposed to be used with WC because you think that WC has no outside game

My view is that WCK's method has two parts, joining with an opponent and then fighting from there.

i believe WCK does have to tools to stay on the outside and fight if you wanted to. its just that the focus is to get on the inside because thats how WC believe they can have an advantage. what WC person have you seen fight that looks like a kicboxer?

You can believe whatever you like.

If you want to see whether or not that's true, then go spend some quality time trying to do that, go to a boxing gym or a MT gym and stay on the outside and see what happens. That's the only way to know.

Any WCK person who stays on the outside and fights will end up looking like a kickboxer because they have to -- a kickboxers tools are what work best at that range, just like if you put someone on the ground it and have them fight it will end up looking like BJJ.

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 07:44 AM

One day....I would pay money to hear you say the words :D anyway enough wasting time .

Pacman

08-03-2009, 07:46 AM

Look, you wrote that "you thought" not that you were reporting your experience. If you want to speak from experience, then say so -- don't assume I can read your mind.

thats the worst BS i have ever read. when someone says "i think what you said in general is true", it doesn't mean they are speaking from pure daydreams and fatnasy. unless you are a foreigner i dont see how any american english speaking person could get confused.

What happens if you feint and he doesn't react but runs over you? Is the feint worth that risk?

thats like saying "what if you punch and he blocks it or moves out of the way", is that worth the risk? if anything, a feint is less of a commitment than a full attack

People can have different experiences and draw different conclusions. I am just stating what mine are. Go look at some clips of 'toughman competitions' on youtube and ask yourself whether or not feints would be a good idea.

you arent just stating your opinion and i think its fairly obvious to everyone that you arent.

i dont need to watch the videos. if you fought competent fighters you would know this.

My view is that WCK's method has two parts, joining with an opponent and then fighting from there.

Any WCK person who stays on the outside and fights will end up looking like a kickboxer because they have to -- a kickboxers tools are what work best at that range, just like if you put someone on the ground it and have them fight it will end up looking like BJJ.

thats a horrible analogy and a ridiculous analogy

i can stay on the outside and maintain WC posture, use WC style hand attacks, footwork. etc

and actually if you put a wrestler on the ground it will look nothing like BJJ

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 07:50 AM

honestly if you are going to continue to be condescending, continually saying "if you fought competent fighters you would know..." is getting old.

at least come up with some new material

Unfortunately, that's the answer to all theory. Hawkins put it this way: "Theory is great but can YOU do it?"

People can come up with all kinds of "ideas" on how they think people should fight or how they think WCK should be applied. Most of those ideas are nonsense. But -- and here's the real rub -- it takes a significant amount of quality experience (sparring/fighting) to recognize the nonsense. So when I hear people say things like "I'll just do this or that" I know from my own experience that if they fought some of the people I train with they simply wouldn't be able to get away with it.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 07:54 AM

Unfortunately, that's the answer to all theory. Hawkins put it this way: "Theory is great but can YOU do it?"

People can come up with all kinds of "ideas" on how they think people should fight or how they think WCK should be applied. Most of those ideas are nonsense. But -- and here's the real rub -- it takes a significant amount of quality experience (sparring/fighting) to recognize the nonsense. So when I hear people say things like "I'll just do this or that" I know from my own experience that if they fought some of the people I train with they simply wouldn't be able to get away with it.

there you go. he admitted it. he thinks he has it all figured out.

heres what i say. it doesnt matter if you fight with quality people. you need to fight with quality people and come to the right conclusions.

also...if you fight with quality people then how do you know so much about unskilled fighters? from videos? thats just fantasy terrence

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 08:01 AM

thats the worst BS i have ever read. when someone says "i think what you said in general is true", it doesn't mean they are speaking from pure daydreams and fatnasy. unless you are a foreigner i dont see how any american english speaking person could get confused.

People say "I think" all the time -- they may think something works based on what they've been told, what they've done in chi sao, etc. As I said, I can't read your mind. If you say, "This works for me down at the MMA gym" that's a very different thing that saying "I think it should work."

thats like saying "what if you punch and he blocks it or moves out of the way", is that worth the risk? if anything, a feint is less of a commitment than a full attack

This is the sort of thing that tellsme you just don't fight/spar. Look -- if you feint and he comes in swinging you're going to eat some punches. That's the risk of feinting. If he doesn't buy into the feint, it is a liability and places you at great risk.

you arent just stating your opinion and i think its fairly obvious to everyone that you arent.

i dont need to watch the videos. if you fought competent fighters you would know this.

I pointed you to some evidence (that supports my view) to consider and you won't even look at it.

thats a horrible analogy and a ridiculous analogy

i can stay on the outside and maintain WC posture, use WC style hand attacks, footwork. etc

and actually if you put a wrestler on the ground it will look nothing like BJJ

First of all, I wasn't suing an analogy. Second, go to a boxing gym and try doing what you say you will do. Then see how long it takes you to start "changing" to boxing. Beleive me, it will happen, otherwise you will just keep getting pounded.

The fundamental skills you need to fight on the outside are in boxing, not in WCK (otherwise WCK would look like boxing).

The fundamental skills you need on the ground are shared by BJJ and wrestling.

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 08:08 AM

there you go. he admitted it. he thinks he has it all figured out.

heres what i say. it doesnt matter if you fight with quality people. you need to fight with quality people and come to the right conclusions.

also...if you fight with quality people then how do you know so much about unskilled fighters? from videos? thats just fantasy terrence

If you go train at places where fighters train, you will mix with people of all skill levels, from rank beginner through experts. For example, at my BJJ school, there are always new guys to roll with as well as brown/black belts and everyone in between. Same in the MMA classes. And, if you are observant, you will see that unskilled people do certain things, fall for certain things, etc. whereas the more skilled people do other things.

What I have "figured out" is that we need good, quality experience -- and lots of it -- with fighting/sparring to be able to draw valid conclusions about it.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 08:09 AM

This is the sort of thing that tellsme you just don't fight/spar. Look -- if you feint and he comes in swinging you're going to eat some punches. That's the risk of feinting. If he doesn't buy into the feint, it is a liability and places you at great risk.

this is the sort of thing that tells me you have no idea what you are talking about.

tell me, which is a bigger commitment. throwing a punch of your own or moving your fist two inches to fake him. which leaves you more open..moving your fist a couple inches or throwing a full punch?

im obviously not saying dont attack, but you are talking about the risk of feinting when the risk of attacking is greater.

I pointed you to some evidence (that supports my view) to consider and you won't even look at it.

i did look at it, but you cant conclude anything by it. just because you have two fighters who go ape sh!t on each other (i mean its called toughman what do you expect) that does not prove that feinting is worthless.

First of all, I wasn't suing an analogy. Second, go to a boxing gym and try doing what you say you will do. Then see how long it takes you to start "changing" to boxing. Beleive me, it will happen, otherwise you will just keep getting pounded.

again. projecting. just beacuse you got your ass handed to you doesn't mean everyone will. and lke i said, i have fought boxers. o did i mention i boxed for 5 years before starting WC? thats how i have experience fighting boxers before and after WC

The fundamental skills you need to fight on the outside are in boxing, not in WCK (otherwise WCK would look like boxing).

ok get specific. what fundamental skill is in boxing that is not WC

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 08:25 AM

this is the sort of thing that tells me you have no idea what you are talking about.

tell me, which is a bigger commitment. throwing a punch of your own or moving your fist two inches to fake him. which leaves you more open..moving your fist a couple inches or throwing a full punch?

im obviously not saying dont attack, but you are talking about the risk of feinting when the risk of attacking is greater.

Go do this -- gear up and get a sparring partner your size or larger. Tell him to go all out, be super-aggressive, try to knock your head off, don't defend, don't try to do WCK or boxing or whatever, just "channel" Tank Abbott. Try feinting, see where it gets you. Spend some time doing that exercise. THEN draw your conclusions.

i did look at it, but you cant conclude anything by it. just because you have two fighters who go ape sh!t on each other (i mean its called toughman what do you expect) that does not prove that feinting is worthless.

What it tells you is THAT is what it is going to be like -- that's what fighting an aggressive, unskilled guy is like. Do you think feints would be useful in THAT?

again. projecting. just beacuse you got your ass handed to you doesn't mean everyone will. and lke i said, i have fought boxers. o did i mention i boxed for 5 years before starting WC? thats how i have experience fighting boxers before and after WC

If you did box, you certainly don't seem to have gotten much from it.

If you think you're right, then go see. It's really that simple.

ok get specific. what fun****etal skill is in boxing that is not WC

Well, to begin with, the body structure which develops our power -- in boxing it is based on rotation, which works best when in noncontact and permits hitting from all angles, etc. whereas WCK's body structure is not based on rotation and works best when attached and not so well when not in contact and doesn't facilitate hitting from all angles, etc.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 08:32 AM

Go do this -- gear up and get a sparring partner your size or larger. Tell him to go all out, be super-aggressive, try to knock your head off, don't defend, don't try to do WCK or boxing or whatever, just "channel" Tank Abbott. Try feinting, see where it gets you. Spend some time doing that exercise. THEN draw your conclusions.

go do this. read my post about this where i already acknowledged what you are talking about here. then come back with your conclusions once you have read past the first sentence.

do you understand im not saying that feints are a silver bullet but you can't rule them out completely...even when against unskilled fighters? i made this quite clear

What it tells you is THAT is what it is going to be like -- that's what fighting an aggressive, unskilled guy is like. Do you think feints would be useful in THAT?

probbly not. i already addresses this issue. please read my posts. lets have a discussion and not a monologue.

If you think you're right, then go see. It's really that simple.

you seriously must be trained by the CIA in interrogation. because talking to you is like some guantanamo sh!t that can drive a person nuts. i have done it. did you read that? i have done it. call me a liar next time...just dont act like i never said it

Well, to begin with, the body structure which develops our power -- in boxing it is based on rotation, which works best when in noncontact and permits hitting from all angles, etc. whereas WCK's body structure is not based on rotation and works best when attached and not so well when not in contact and doesn't facilitate hitting from all angles, etc.

yikes. it is based on rotation. who the hell taught you

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 08:41 AM

yikes. it is based on rotation. who the hell taught you

No, WCK's body structure isn't based on rotation -- do you rotate in your SNT or in your YJKYM? WCK power doesn't come from rotation. WCK power is like the hammer-nail (according to Sum Nung), and that's why we can hit or do whatever without the need to change our facing.

Even the WCK turning isn't rotation like what boxer's do, it is the type of turning you use when attached to turn your opponent or break his structure.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 08:45 AM

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 09:09 AM

YES WE TURN IN YJKYM!

well this really explains it. so you learned sum nung WC? then at least we can talk in common terms

in SN WC, all power comes from the "turning stance". ive also heard people call it the "pivoting stance" or "switching stance". basically turning while in YJKYM

this turning is the basis of just about every move in the sup yee san sik.

yes this type of rotating is not like a boxers, who turn with shoulders going across the body

did you learn any of the 12 san sik? do you know what they are for? those are NOT infighting moves. those are all ways to fight on the outside!

You are a beginner, right?

WCK power does not depend on body movement, whether stepping or turning. This is why the SNT is done stationary, to teach this sort of body mechanic. The turning horse is done WHEN IN CONTACT, not from noncontact. The turning horse is nothing at all like what boxer's do.

The mechanics that work in noncontact and contact are very, very different. You can't have one that works well in both contact and noncontact. If you put a boxer into an attached situation with a wrestler, the boxer's attempts to rotate will get him tossed.

The WCK tools -- including those in the 12san sik -- are, for the most part, contact, attached fighting tools. The body mechanics support that.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 09:20 AM

You are a beginner, right?

WCK power does not depend on body movement, whether stepping or turning. This is why the SNT is done stationary, to teach this sort of body mechanic. The turning horse is done WHEN IN CONTACT, not from noncontact. The turning horse is nothing at all like what boxer's do.

The mechanics that work in noncontact and contact are very, very different. You can't have one that works well in both contact and noncontact. If you put a boxer into an attached situation with a wrestler, the boxer's attempts to rotate will get him tossed.

The WCK tools -- including those in the 12san sik -- are, for the most part, contact, attached fighting tools. The body mechanics support that.

no i am definietly not just starting out

wrong wrong wrong. completely incorrect.

i already said the turning horse is different than what boxers do, but its purpose can be to generate power in strikes as well as evasion

if WC power does not depend on body movement, how the hell do you generate power?

SNT purpose is to teach other things--not power.

please tell me how triangle palms, side punch/kneeling punch, arrow step punch, and flapping wing palm (all in the 12 san sik) are solely for attached in-fighting and how they cannot be applied from the outside.

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 09:27 AM

no i am definietly not just starting out

wrong wrong wrong. completely incorrect.

i already said the turning horse is different than what boxers do, but its purpose can be to generate power in strikes as well as evasion

if WC power does not depend on body movement, how the hell do you generate power?

SNT purpose is to teach other things--not power.

please tell me how triangle palms, side punch/kneeling punch, arrow step punch, and flapping wing palm (all in the 12 san sik) are solely for attached in-fighting and how they cannot be applied from the outside.

Where are you located?

punchdrunk

08-03-2009, 11:34 AM

I know this is derailing the topic but... if you don't move your body in some way all your doing is arm punching. True the first form is stationary but chum kiu teaches both shifting (pivoting) and linear stepping. Bui jee also teaches different body motions (bending, straightening, twisting). The mok jong teaches stepping around and again body motions (bending, straightening, twisting). Of course those are just the forms but there are many drills that go along as well. In Wing Chun we tend not to focus on power and instead think of structure and position, but the motion to get to that position in that structure should have power. SNT punching is incomplete.

Phil Redmond

08-03-2009, 12:22 PM

You are a beginner, right?

WCK power does not depend on body movement, whether stepping or turning. This is why the SNT is done stationary, to teach this sort of body mechanic. The turning horse is done WHEN IN CONTACT, not from noncontact. The turning horse is nothing at all like what boxer's do.

The mechanics that work in noncontact and contact are very, very different. You can't have one that works well in both contact and noncontact. If you put a boxer into an attached situation with a wrestler, the boxer's attempts to rotate will get him tossed.

The WCK tools -- including those in the 12san sik -- are, for the most part, contact, attached fighting tools. The body mechanics support that.
You are waaaaaaay off there. The 1st form I learned in both TWC and the other WC I learned was to train the arm positions in relationship to the centerline so that when you do "turn" your arms will stay in the same positions and not flail away. It's like maintaing the home keys on a keyboard. If you leave the home keys you type garble. In the other forms turning is emphasized because like in an old Chinese martial arts saying, "all movemen begins at the waist. Even the blinking of an eye". To say the ANY athetic activity doesn't depend on body movement tells me a lot. Now I see why you most WC hand techs won't work against resisting opponents. You say turning should only be used during contact and not contact? Sometimes you have to get out of the way just before contact like in avoiding the shoot and that requires moving

t_niehoff

08-03-2009, 01:36 PM

You are waaaaaaay off there. The 1st form I learned in both TWC and the other WC I learned was to train the arm positions in relationship to the centerline so that when you do "turn" your arms will stay in the same positions and not flail away. It's like maintaing the home keys on a keyboard. If you leave the home keys you type garble. In the other forms turning is emphasized because like in an old Chinese martial arts saying, "all movemen begins at the waist. Even the blinking of an eye". To say the ANY athetic activity doesn't depend on body movement tells me a lot. Now I see why you most WC hand techs won't work against resisting opponents. You say turning should only be used during contact and not contact? Sometimes you have to get out of the way just before contact like in avoiding the shoot and that requires moving

Phil, the body does power every action in the SNT -- that movement simply isn't stepping or turning, it is a stationary power that is the basis of WCK. The kuit "Siu Nim Tao Lien Yiu Sen Ma" - Siu Nim Tao trains the waist, torso, and horse - refers to that. If you have developed that body mechanic, what Robert calls body structure, then your stationary punch from YJKYM will have real, solid power. You will be able to receive pressure to "stay as he comes", for instance.

I never said WCK hand techniques don't work against resisting opponent. Stop making things up.

The WCK turning as taught in the forms and used in the drills is contact mechanics, for when you are in contact. That is a different form of mechanics than turning in noncontact like boxers do. Contact turning uses the whole body in connected power.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 02:00 PM

Phil, the body does power every action in the SNT -- that movement simply isn't stepping or turning, it is a stationary power that is the basis of WCK. The kuit "Siu Nim Tao Lien Yiu Sen Ma" - Siu Nim Tao trains the waist, torso, and horse - refers to that. If you have developed that body mechanic, what Robert calls body structure, then your stationary punch from YJKYM will have real, solid power. You will be able to receive pressure to "stay as he comes", for instance.

please tell me this is a joke. you think all WC punches are done without any movement or rotation of the body?!

regarding what you said above...even if your structure is solid, like you were backed up against a brick wall, your punch will only be as powerful as the arm that throws it, i.e. not very powerful.

you should ask whoever taught you SN WC about the arrow step punch. that is one of the 12 san sik where you whip your body to generate power. there are others...but just ask about that one.

The WCK turning as taught in the forms and used in the drills is contact mechanics, for when you are in contact. That is a different form of mechanics than turning in noncontact like boxers do. Contact turning uses the whole body in connected power.

if you learned SN WC, then the 12 san sik are what you should have learned first. what makes you think that the 12 san sik are only for when you have contact?

goju

08-03-2009, 03:23 PM

lo this is some funny ****
everybody knows wing chun evolved from the crane hand and the crane is renown for its whipping body movements

good lord i say!

k gledhill

08-03-2009, 04:36 PM

terence is deep in his well...ribbett, ribbett ;)

Liddel

08-03-2009, 08:37 PM

This is the sort of thing that tellsme you just don't fight/spar. Look -- if you feint and he comes in swinging you're going to eat some punches. That's the risk of feinting. If he doesn't buy into the feint, it is a liability and places you at great risk.

He's jerking your chain... for one the experts and proven fighters he tells us to look at use feints often, you only have to watch the last few UFC's to see an example or two and they dont just happen in standup, so :rolleyes:

And second there are many things that are risky in fighting but we constanly see and i for one constantly experience that when risky things are done and actually pulled off - the risk is worth the reward...

Ive taken a grain of salt with that quote :cool:

Phil, the body does power every action in the SNT -- that movement simply isn't stepping or turning, it is a stationary power that is the basis of WCK

In my VT we take the actions of SLT and put them on the CK horse to then have a complete mechanic for fighting. Turning is extremely importnant and vastly differnt to that of boxing in your previously mentioned example.. with a boxing turn your point holds water, with a VT mechanic not so much IME given our specific approach to economy of motion and that we use contact mechanics as you said.

DREW

Phil Redmond

08-03-2009, 09:48 PM

Phil, the body does power every action in the SNT -- that movement simply isn't stepping or turning, it is a stationary power that is the basis of WCK. The kuit "Siu Nim Tao Lien Yiu Sen Ma" - Siu Nim Tao trains the waist, torso, and horse - refers to that. If you have developed that body mechanic, what Robert calls body structure, then your stationary punch from YJKYM will have real, solid power. You will be able to receive pressure to "stay as he comes", for instance.

I never said WCK hand techniques don't work against resisting opponent. Stop making things up.

The WCK turning as taught in the forms and used in the drills is contact mechanics, for when you are in contact. That is a different form of mechanics than turning in noncontact like boxers do. Contact turning uses the whole body in connected power.
First of all Robert is not THE authority on WCK. And especially not in TWC. We have five stages of contact. The first 3 apply to any fight. You're basing your statement on what you know and understand. I base mine on what I know.

Pacman

08-03-2009, 09:52 PM

robert as in robert chu author of that book?

neihoff was taught by robert chu?

Liddel

08-03-2009, 09:57 PM

robert as in robert chu author of that book?

neihoff was taught by robert chu?

You see Pac when a tree is elevated on a hill, the apple can not only fall far from the tree but get a roll on and end up far far away battered and bruised....LOL :o

DREW

k gledhill

08-04-2009, 06:51 AM

No, WCK's body structure isn't based on rotation -- do you rotate in your SNT or in your YJKYM? WCK power doesn't come from rotation. WCK power is like the hammer-nail (according to Sum Nung), and that's why we can hit or do whatever without the need to change our facing.

Even the WCK turning isn't rotation like what boxer's do, it is the type of turning you use when attached to turn your opponent or break his structure.

What you wrote T is really revealing to your fundamental lack of understanding a flowing attacking system.

Seriously , you need to get out more.

We turn only to face the direction of our opponents...that may also include us turning to face as we 'guide' them past us..:D

SLT teaches a lot of things , one of them being 'FACING' , so you can reach across either flank and strike or use each hand as the other strikes in the same range..iow we can use either arm seamlessly as the fighter turns before us.
We only adopt a facing equal starting point in Chi-sao drills for each arm to be able to be developed for either side...Adding entry and counter stepping ..= movement.

To be able to do this 'facing' effortlessly, we use chum kil form, ck is for facing the direction of the moving target...as we attack it to end the fight as quickly as possible.
Not for trying to use a turning response throwing your arms off the line to do a flying tan, etc...

We can use tan in chi-sao to show a certain 'space' we occupy as we do stance drills in chi-sao...but once fighting we try to use one leading hand to strike first and the rear to strike second ...repeat as often as required...

Too much chi-sao leads to redundant ideas of turning kwan -sao stuff while your opponent is still facing square to you as YOU TURN ...not good idea if you understand the objective....

You can [ I wouldnt try to ] adopt a kwan from outside the 2 arm lines because either of the isolated ones will still be working from a 'dead side' to you...

When you train the dummy there are imaginary dummy positions either side of the main body....when we rotate from attack combo to another attacking combo..it is to be facing the line of our elbows /hands to the targets after the previous deflection move...

NOT to turn away from the guy coming at us adn then turn to reface them :D

When you understand the saying GM Y Man said " We allow the opponent to show us what to do"

you will see clearly that we cant possibly train moves for gates and stand facing in the center to them as a chi-sao drill starts...% mean you will sooner or later get hit/cut FASTER than by adopting the tactical ideas.

Knife and hands have similar tactics for what reason ? do you adopt the chi-sao facing for knife fighting against a guy with 2 knives ? wouldnt adopting a blind side to their stabbing entry be a better alternative, thus avoiding a possible counter form their 'live' other hand...

Knives involve a LOT of mobility we adopt similar facing ides to be able to respond 'thoughtlessly' to their entry line/stab/swing/chop...sure we may not be able to do it for every action ....BUT you will try for the simple reason of raising your chances of survival....not about a trophy.

t_niehoff

08-04-2009, 08:14 AM

First of all Robert is not THE authority on WCK. And especially not in TWC. We have five stages of contact. The first 3 apply to any fight. You're basing your statement on what you know and understand. I base mine on what I know.

No one is an authority on WCK.

Contact is contact, you can break it down into how many "stages" you like. How you "break it down" doesn't change the reality of it.

I'm am not talking about TWC -- I'm talking about WCK.

t_niehoff

08-04-2009, 08:21 AM

please tell me this is a joke. you think all WC punches are done without any movement or rotation of the body?!

NO, try to read and understand what I am saying.

I am saying that the base body structure of WCK, the YJKYM, is stationary, and the power generation that WCK uses does not DEPEND on rotation. We can turn or step but our power does not depend or derive from that.

regarding what you said above...even if your structure is solid, like you were backed up against a brick wall, your punch will only be as powerful as the arm that throws it, i.e. not very powerful.

You believe this because you do not have the WCK body structure and don't know how to use the (stationary) YJKYM to generate power. But you're not alone -- most people believe as you do because THEY HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED IT.

you should ask whoever taught you SN WC about the arrow step punch. that is one of the 12 san sik where you whip your body to generate power. there are others...but just ask about that one.

And what is the very first san sik that you learn? Hmmm? Oh, the meridian punch from the stationary YJKYM?

if you learned SN WC, then the 12 san sik are what you should have learned first. what makes you think that the 12 san sik are only for when you have contact?

Application tell me that.

Pacman

08-04-2009, 10:20 AM

NO, try to read and understand what I am saying.

I am saying that the base body structure of WCK, the YJKYM, is stationary, and the power generation that WCK uses does not DEPEND on rotation. We can turn or step but our power does not depend or derive from that.

i completely understood that. and i am saying that power generation is based on turning. sure you need structure, but it is nothing without turning.

You believe this because you do not have the WCK body structure and don't know how to use the (stationary) YJKYM to generate power. But you're not alone -- most people believe as you do because THEY HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED IT.

i know because its a fact. its simple physics. even if you do not have a physics degree its plainly obvious. if you have the best "structure" in the world, then nothing can move your body, so when you hit something you do not lose any energy in the recoil. all energy is transferred to the target.

but what's moving towards the target. just your arm. the energy is a factor of the speed and mass of the arm. if the body does not move at all...thats it.

And what is the very first san sik that you learn? Hmmm? Oh, the meridian punch from the stationary YJKYM?

so what. i didnt say all are practiced with turning. how can you explain the san sik that involve turning?

t_niehoff

08-04-2009, 11:01 AM

i completely understood that. and i am saying that power generation is based on turning. sure you need structure, but it is nothing without turning.

You're simply wrong. Where are you located?

i know because its a fact. its simple physics. even if you do not have a physics degree its plainly obvious.

I do have a physics degree -- a BS in physics.

if you have the best "structure" in the world, then nothing can move your body, so when you hit something you do not lose any energy in the recoil. all energy is transferred to the target.

The above is nonsense.

As I said, while the body is stationary -- in that the feet don't move and in that we don't TURN our hips -- the YJKYM is a body mechanic that generates power. That mechanic involves the legs, hips, back, stomach, glutes, etc. but not in stepping or turning. Can you lift a heavy weight without stepping or turning? Sure. Do you use your whole body to lift it? Sure. While the mechanics are not the same, I use that example to illustrate that you can develop power without stepping or turning.

but what's moving towards the target. just your arm. the energy is a factor of the speed and mass of the arm. if the body does not move at all...thats it.

The body does move in YJKYM but it doesn't step or turn.

Clearly, you have no idea what I'm talking about because you never learned this.

so what. i didnt say all are practiced with turning. how can you explain the san sik that involve turning?

Because they all involve being in contact with an opponent (you certainly don't want to turn like that in noncontact).

Pacman

08-04-2009, 12:41 PM

As I said, while the body is stationary -- in that the feet don't move and in that we don't TURN our hips -- the YJKYM is a body mechanic that generates power. That mechanic involves the legs, hips, back, stomach, glutes, etc. but not in stepping or turning. Can you lift a heavy weight without stepping or turning? Sure. Do you use your whole body to lift it? Sure. While the mechanics are not the same, I use that example to illustrate that you can develop power without stepping or turning.

ok so obviously i misunderstood. i was thinking that you were saying that the only body in motion is the arm. help me understand, when you punch what moves? obviously the arm...but if not the feet and not the hips...what is in motion?

Because they all involve being in contact with an opponent (you certainly don't want to turn like that in noncontact).

ok, so help me understand this...i will pick one of the san sik...how does the "side punch" or "kneeling side punch" (im not sure if whoever taught you called it that) deal with contact, when the whole purpose of these moves is EVASION i.e. being where your opponent isnt

the whole point of that move is simultaneous evasion and attack! you are starting from a point of non contact.

Phil Redmond

08-04-2009, 04:47 PM

robert as in robert chu author of that book?

neihoff was taught by robert chu?
Yes, Robert Chu co-author of The Complete Wing Chun.

Phil Redmond

08-04-2009, 04:53 PM

. . . The WCK turning as taught in the forms and used in the drills is contact mechanics, for when you are in contact. . .

Not true all the time. Turning can be done just before contact. ALL fights start pre-contact. Sometimes you turn/move to avoid and attack then make contact as the attack goes by. Not only do I teach this but also I competed with this WCK principle.

Pacman

08-04-2009, 06:08 PM

Yes, Robert Chu co-author of The Complete Wing Chun.

terrence i suggest you read that book, because i think your WC understanding is a bit incomplete. no offense intended.

That mechanic involves the legs, hips, back, stomach, glutes, etc. but not in stepping or turning. Can you lift a heavy weight without stepping or turning? Sure. Do you use your whole body to lift it? Sure.

ermm...when i bend over to lift something the actual lifting comes from my legs and lower back...and they all move.

i still dont see how you can punch w/o moving your feet, legs, torso, or hips and have power come from anywhere besides the arm. if the arm is the only thing in motion...where is this energy coming from?

if WC strikes do not involve turning, how the hell do you throw elbow strikes?

k gledhill

08-04-2009, 06:10 PM

We only turn to face the attack line....no contact beyond strikes can be done, and is in my experience...fist+face=contact
I only turn to the correct the angle of tactical delivery, if I can....

The idea of the system is to have a frame work of moving arms that both strike and deflect as they are striking....if they meet contact they can simply retract to allow the following hand to take the opening made from the preceding hands exchange....or trap the ability of the opponent from stopping follow up strikes....

The integrity of the arms angles is developed by chi-sao drills , dan chi-sao...etc...progressively leaving chi-sao contact for more realistic face offs and entry exchanges ...striking. No pre-rolling or basic stance is done....just fighting with strikes and rotating strike defflction cycles, while facing the changing angles presented during the fight ...

Still waiting for your tactical explanation of you knife and bare hands Terence...?:D

which thought process overrides the other as you have guy attack you with 2 knives....stand and stick , control ...? or move baby move and cut as you do ;)

Yoshiyahu

08-04-2009, 07:03 PM

You guys are way off Topic. Feinting is a great tool I use it in attacks. I incorporate Feints/Fake in my WC . Some skilled fighters who are not experience with fighting against feints also fall short too hear. I also utilize blinding techniques. To distract. These things I have picked up from fighting, Studing other fighting styles, Experimenting with the WC, An from other people.

How ever Feints and Fakes are not apart of the WC. Feints are not in tune with encomony of motion. Its a wasted motion actually. But I like doing them to confuse my opponent. Feints are not as feasible inclose combat either. Because when your toe to toe you don't have alot of room to be throwing out wasted non-attacking motion. You will be to busy attacking or defending when your in Chi Sau or Clinch range.

I typically use feints from mid range and long range. They work well in unison with kicks. High feint for a low attack. Its alot fun when sparring.

However WC is about ending the fight quickly. WC is about controlling your opponent, destroying his structure and taking him out. The Feints I incorporate mostly come from Jeet Kune Do and Boxing. Which Bruce Lee learn from boxing and not WC. Traditional Yip WC Sifus who fight do not speak of feints.

I regretfully have to agree with Terrence. His premise is Feints are not apart of WC system. Well T your right. :mad:

But that doesn't mean one can incorporate Feints into your fighting.

Terrence you said WC is a close combat system Well T your freakin right again:mad:

That doesn't mean I can spar or train and drill defense and attacks from the outside. If you want your WC to be able fight from the outside you have to first

1.Drill outside defense and attack
2.Light Spar from the outside
3.Hard Spar from the outside

Then when you get skilled in these areas you will have both outside and inside. But a true outside fighter utilizes long range kicks. WC utilizes short range and mid range kicks. So an outside fighter will have an advantage over you trying to stay outside. Just food for thought. Outside fighting is another reason why incorporate feinting.

WC "Kung" or "Skill" is being able to fight inclose by feeling your opponent.

Chi Sau is develop sensitivity for inside fighting. The entire WC system is based on Inside fighting...

All the Forms deal with inside fighting.

In an actual fight I don't see the possiblity of feints being use. Unless I am the aggressor and I use them to attack my enemy and gain entry but one we are locked up and I am controlling him to strike him. Feints will not be safe to be used at the distance. But when I spar typically if someone tries to feint I simply attack them continously flowing constantly and jam up their space. I don't allow them to loose contact or use distance to feint. If they do attempt to feint at mid range distance then I attack their feints. I punish their limbs and attack their feints until they don't put their arms up no more. An then my punishing techniques go to attacking the body and face.

But feints are fun. i like them. They are not practical in real street fights. Most of the time. Unless you have someone who is trying to stay away from you. But most of the time the aggressor simply tries to charge you.

For all practical purposes T is right on the ball in this thread!

Sure it is.

But, I'll give you my experience with regard to feints.

Generally, in fighting you won't have the opportunity to or need to use feints. To understand why, you need to know what feints are for -- their tactical significance: they are used to create offensive openings. That presupposes two things: firstly, that you have the time to do that; and secondly, that your opponent is sufficiently skilled to not have any openings (so that you need to create some). Most fights, including "streetfights", that you encounter won't provide those two preconditions. In most fights, including streetfights, your opponent will be highly aggressive, and throwing relentless attacks so you won't have the time to feint (look at some youtube fights or some 'toughman competitions' for examples of what I mean). Nor if you do will they have any effect -- unskilled, aggressive fighters won't react but simply keep coming at you and attacking. And unskilled or poorly skilled fighters, particularly highly aggressive ones, have all kinds of holes so there is no need to set up your offensive action with feints.

Typically, feinting has not been a part of the WCK curriculum-- it's not in the forms, the drills, talked about in the kuit, etc. And, that's because feints are not a big part of an inside game, and even less a part of an attached game. Feints mainly play a part on the outside, and then only when facing well-skilled fighters.

Phil Redmond

08-04-2009, 08:29 PM

Phil Redmond

08-04-2009, 08:33 PM

I just checked that thread and found out that Terence made this post
Originally Posted by Phil Redmond
That mechanic involves the legs, hips, back, stomach, glutes, etc. but not in stepping or turning. Can you lift a heavy weight without stepping or turning? Sure. Do you use your whole body to lift it? Sure
Somehow you attached my name to it. ;)

Pacman

08-04-2009, 11:49 PM

i agree one would use feints in long to mid range.

yes they are not in the forms because feints and other things that make up a persons personal style (such as a set fighting stance) are left flexible to the practitioner. IMO they are not endorsed or opposed by WC philosophy.

if all fights started in the close range, then yeah you would never use feints in a "street fight"

however this is not always the case. look to the video in the post about the black guy who was attacked by skinheads in canada for a quick example.

i dont understand you say WC has no long range kicks. WC has front kick and side kick (generally up to the chest) which are considered long range.

if traditional Yip sifus do not speak of feints...that is their WC. thats how they choose to fight with their WC knowledge.

i dont think its prohibited by WC fighting philosphies

You guys are way off Topic. Feinting is a great tool I use it in attacks. I incorporate Feints/Fake in my WC . Some skilled fighters who are not experience with fighting against feints also fall short too hear. I also utilize blinding techniques. To distract. These things I have picked up from fighting, Studing other fighting styles, Experimenting with the WC, An from other people.

How ever Feints and Fakes are not apart of the WC. Feints are not in tune with encomony of motion. Its a wasted motion actually. But I like doing them to confuse my opponent. Feints are not as feasible inclose combat either. Because when your toe to toe you don't have alot of room to be throwing out wasted non-attacking motion. You will be to busy attacking or defending when your in Chi Sau or Clinch range.

I typically use feints from mid range and long range. They work well in unison with kicks. High feint for a low attack. Its alot fun when sparring.

However WC is about ending the fight quickly. WC is about controlling your opponent, destroying his structure and taking him out. The Feints I incorporate mostly come from Jeet Kune Do and Boxing. Which Bruce Lee learn from boxing and not WC. Traditional Yip WC Sifus who fight do not speak of feints.

I regretfully have to agree with Terrence. His premise is Feints are not apart of WC system. Well T your right. :mad:

But that doesn't mean one can incorporate Feints into your fighting.

Terrence you said WC is a close combat system Well T your freakin right again:mad:

That doesn't mean I can spar or train and drill defense and attacks from the outside. If you want your WC to be able fight from the outside you have to first

1.Drill outside defense and attack
2.Light Spar from the outside
3.Hard Spar from the outside

Then when you get skilled in these areas you will have both outside and inside. But a true outside fighter utilizes long range kicks. WC utilizes short range and mid range kicks. So an outside fighter will have an advantage over you trying to stay outside. Just food for thought. Outside fighting is another reason why incorporate feinting.

WC "Kung" or "Skill" is being able to fight inclose by feeling your opponent.

Chi Sau is develop sensitivity for inside fighting. The entire WC system is based on Inside fighting...

All the Forms deal with inside fighting.

In an actual fight I don't see the possiblity of feints being use. Unless I am the aggressor and I use them to attack my enemy and gain entry but one we are locked up and I am controlling him to strike him. Feints will not be safe to be used at the distance. But when I spar typically if someone tries to feint I simply attack them continously flowing constantly and jam up their space. I don't allow them to loose contact or use distance to feint. If they do attempt to feint at mid range distance then I attack their feints. I punish their limbs and attack their feints until they don't put their arms up no more. An then my punishing techniques go to attacking the body and face.

But feints are fun. i like them. They are not practical in real street fights. Most of the time. Unless you have someone who is trying to stay away from you. But most of the time the aggressor simply tries to charge you.

For all practical purposes T is right on the ball in this thread!

Pacman

08-04-2009, 11:59 PM

sorry dude. i fixed it

k gledhill

08-05-2009, 05:54 AM

You guys are way off Topic. Feinting is a great tool I use it in attacks. I incorporate Feints/Fake in my WC . Some skilled fighters who are not experience with fighting against feints also fall short too hear. I also utilize blinding techniques. To distract. These things I have picked up from fighting, Studing other fighting styles, Experimenting with the WC, An from other people.

How ever Feints and Fakes are not apart of the WC. Feints are not in tune with encomony of motion. Its a wasted motion actually. But I like doing them to confuse my opponent. Feints are not as feasible inclose combat either. Because when your toe to toe you don't have alot of room to be throwing out wasted non-attacking motion. You will be to busy attacking or defending when your in Chi Sau or Clinch range.

I typically use feints from mid range and long range. They work well in unison with kicks. High feint for a low attack. Its alot fun when sparring.

However WC is about ending the fight quickly. WC is about controlling your opponent, destroying his structure and taking him out. The Feints I incorporate mostly come from Jeet Kune Do and Boxing. Which Bruce Lee learn from boxing and not WC. Traditional Yip WC Sifus who fight do not speak of feints.

I regretfully have to agree with Terrence. His premise is Feints are not apart of WC system. Well T your right. :mad:

But that doesn't mean one can incorporate Feints into your fighting.

Terrence you said WC is a close combat system Well T your freakin right again:mad:

That doesn't mean I can spar or train and drill defense and attacks from the outside. If you want your WC to be able fight from the outside you have to first

1.Drill outside defense and attack
2.Light Spar from the outside
3.Hard Spar from the outside

Then when you get skilled in these areas you will have both outside and inside. But a true outside fighter utilizes long range kicks. WC utilizes short range and mid range kicks. So an outside fighter will have an advantage over you trying to stay outside. Just food for thought. Outside fighting is another reason why incorporate feinting.

WC "Kung" or "Skill" is being able to fight inclose by feeling your opponent.

Chi Sau is develop sensitivity for inside fighting. The entire WC system is based on Inside fighting...

All the Forms deal with inside fighting.

In an actual fight I don't see the possiblity of feints being use. Unless I am the aggressor and I use them to attack my enemy and gain entry but one we are locked up and I am controlling him to strike him. Feints will not be safe to be used at the distance. But when I spar typically if someone tries to feint I simply attack them continously flowing constantly and jam up their space. I don't allow them to loose contact or use distance to feint. If they do attempt to feint at mid range distance then I attack their feints. I punish their limbs and attack their feints until they don't put their arms up no more. An then my punishing techniques go to attacking the body and face.

But feints are fun. i like them. They are not practical in real street fights. Most of the time. Unless you have someone who is trying to stay away from you. But most of the time the aggressor simply tries to charge you.

For all practical purposes T is right on the ball in this thread!

All forms deal with inside fighting ?

how do you spar with butterfly knives ? what tactics do you adopt ....curious.:D

k gledhill

08-05-2009, 06:11 AM

terrence i suggest you read that book, because i think your WC understanding is a bit incomplete. no offense intended.

ermm...when i bend over to lift something the actual lifting comes from my legs and lower back...and they all move.

i still dont see how you can punch w/o moving your feet, legs, torso, or hips and have power come from anywhere besides the arm. if the arm is the only thing in motion...where is this energy coming from?

if WC strikes do not involve turning, how the hell do you throw elbow strikes?

technically there are no 'elbow strikes' , you can adopt the bil gee elbow and strike as you regain your wrists from a grab etc...by striking forwards and attacking in a flowing direction ...when WE turn ourselves from our own attacking line momentum it also stops the attacking intent....continuously attacking with attacking actions.
A reason we use lop sao is to regain a flow line, that has been stopped or needs starting:D jut sao on the other hands is a technique that allows the attack line to be maintained miss or not from someone feinting US...lop on the other hand will open us up if we miss the feint....

to turn yourself on your axis line [head/feet] before each other is bad. it offers the very idea your taking advantage of in others...turning themselves before you.

Because we train to face the angles WE need ..it also allows the opponent to turn unhindered offering flanks or arm angles we can simply strike into AND utuilize our simultaneous strike defense entry lines....aka punch or two.
If we are over occupied with stopping arms that are simply going to miss us We can become controllers and go to over sticking...chasing.

VT strikes involve FACING at angles, tactically being evasive and shifting with the movements of your opponent..or striking at arm angles with your corresponding trained arm strikes ....when the timing is correct the forces are amplified....

Using the leg force driven into the ground and striking/pushing/trapping we use the quadriceps ...simple physics , equal force into the ground comes back, channeled through your structure to the point of your arm/fist/hand no structure no force , no timing no... no balance no....chi-sao develops these requirements...if you let it ;) rather than wrsiting feeling ,chasing stuff, in a fixed stance

Pacman

08-05-2009, 06:25 AM

technically there are no 'elbow strikes'

i guess our WC is different. we have horizontal and downward elbow strikes

Using the leg force driven into the ground and striking/pushing/trapping we use the quadriceps ...simple physics , equal force into the ground comes back, channeled through your structure to the point of your arm/fist/hand no structure no force , no timing no... no balance no....chi-sao develops these requirements...if you let it ;) rather than wrsiting feeling ,chasing stuff, in a fixed stance

if you are talking about the quads holding a static position, so that equal force into the ground comes back, that is exactly what i am talking about too.

you are maximizing the delivery of energy into your target, because no recoil energy is waisted in moving your body structure around. think about hitting a baseball with an aluminum bat vs. a wooden bat. the wooden bat has more flex and thus energy is lost--as a result the ball doesn't go as far. the aluminum bat has a more solid structure and thus less energy is lost.

but like i said, you are just maximizing the delivery of energy into the opponent with the use of your structure. your structure does not "generate" any energy of its own. all the energy of the strike comes from the only thing in motion...which is the arm.

if you increased the mass of the moving system (so that its not just the arm) by adding parts or all of your body (through turning or stepping) you will increase the energy and thus the power of the strike.

there are only two ways you can increase power, and that is to increase mass or increase velocity.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 06:34 AM

ok so obviously i misunderstood. i was thinking that you were saying that the only body in motion is the arm. help me understand, when you punch what moves? obviously the arm...but if not the feet and not the hips...what is in motion?

The body structure/mechanic called YJKYM involves the whole body moving, the legs, hips (but not in rotation), the stomach, back, chest, head, etc. just that you are stationary, i.e., you are not turning or stepping.

This is one of the fundamental skills of WCK, which is the basis of the 4 torso methods of the SNT. You can't learn this skill by reading it (if you want to see it in action, Alan Orr has a DVD set on it), you need to experience it firsthand. That's why I keep asking where you are located. Why won't you answer that question?

ok, so help me understand this...i will pick one of the san sik...how does the "side punch" or "kneeling side punch" (im not sure if whoever taught you called it that) deal with contact, when the whole purpose of these moves is EVASION i.e. being where your opponent isnt

The turning and kneeling is too slow for evasion, it will get you run over. Go spar with some really aggressive, nonWCK fighters and you'll see that. The turning punch, for example, won't work in noncontact -- it's too slow. But it works when you are in attached fighting since the attachment slows things down. Same with the kneeling horse. The "purpose" (poor choice of words IMO) of the turning and the kneeling is to break the opponent's body structure, not evasion.

the whole point of that move is simultaneous evasion and attack! you are starting from a point of non contact.

No.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 06:46 AM

The body structure/mechanic called YJKYM involves the whole body moving, the legs, hips (but not in rotation), the stomach, back, chest, head, etc. just that you are stationary, i.e., you are not turning or stepping.

you said the whole body moves. then you said that you are stationary? are you saying the whole body is frozen and it somehow floats forward? am i the only one confused?

if the whole body moves, but not turning or stepping...how does it move? does it move up? down? there are six directions. up down left right forward backward. which way does it move as you strike?

This is one of the fundamental skills of WCK, which is the basis of the 4 torso methods of the SNT. You can't learn this skill by reading it (if you want to see it in action, Alan Orr has a DVD set on it), you need to experience it firsthand. That's why I keep asking where you are located. Why won't you answer that question?

im not located near missouri or the UK if thats what you're wondering. my job actually keeps me on the go. i usually have no permanent residence for more than 6 months.

The turning and kneeling is too slow for evasion, it will get you run over. Go spar with some really aggressive, nonWCK fighters and you'll see that. The turning punch, for example, won't work in noncontact -- it's too slow. But it works when you are in attached fighting since the attachment slows things down. Same with the kneeling horse. The "purpose" (poor choice of words IMO) of the turning and the kneeling is to break the opponent's body structure, not evasion.

i understand your situation. you maybe learned the 12 san sik, but you never learned how to apply it. maybe your teacher didnt even know. not surpised. in many cases, there is a difference between the way you practice and the way you apply it in combat

you do not actually kneel and punch. you train that way because you are exaggerating the movement. you are developing the muscles to move up and down as you strike. the thought is that if you are able to easily move so far up and down from a kneeling position, moving a 1/4 or even 1/2 down will be easy. its like training with weighted gloves.

in real application you do not need to get so low that you knee, you just need to get low enough to evade.

it is just like the arrow step punch. when practicing it looks almost like you are lunging with a fencing sword. obviously thats a ridiculous move to use in a fight as you are way overcommitted. but it is practiced that way to develop certain skills i wont discuss in detail here...likewise, when applying it, it is not as exaggerated

turning and punching works as that is one of my favorite moves. it is like "slipping" and punching. i made sure to use a boxing reference because i know you will love it.

if you learned WCK and understood it, you would know this.

this is f'in sad. but in a way i completely empathize with you now. its not your fault that you have these views and conclusions of WC. this is what you were taught

if my understanding of WC was the same as your's id friggin love MT too. hell i'd be on dales jock and think chi sau was useless and call everyone who used WC an idiot.

i totally get it now.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 07:49 AM

you said the whole body moves. then you said that you are stationary? are you saying the whole body is frozen and it somehow floats forward? am i the only one confused?

if the whole body moves, but not turning or stepping...how does it move? does it move up? down? there are six directions. up down left right forward backward. which way does it move as you strike?

You are not going to understand it through my writings -- you need to experience it yourself. This is why I keep asking where you are located? There are various people who have this skill that I can direct you to. If you want to PM me, that's fine.

You can look at Alan's DVDs on body structure and see it in action.

i understand your situation. you maybe learned the 12 san sik, but you never learned how to apply it. maybe your teacher didnt even know. not surpised. in many cases, there is a difference between the way you practice and the way you apply it in combat

If you beleive you know how to do it, then go out and fight/spar with some skilled fighters and see. It won't work as you think it will -- but until you DO THE WORK you won't see.

you do not actually kneel and punch. you train that way because you are exaggerating the movement. you are developing the muscles to move up and down as you strike. the thought is that if you are able to easily move so far up and down from a kneeling position, moving a 1/4 or even 1/2 down will be easy. its like training with weighted gloves.

in real application you do not need to get so low that you knee, you just need to get low enough to evade.

it is just like the arrow step punch. when practicing it looks almost like you are lunging with a fencing sword. obviously thats a ridiculous move to use in a fight as you are way overcommitted. but it is practiced that way to develop certain skills i wont discuss in detail here...likewise, when applying it, it is not as exaggerated

turning and punching works as that is one of my favorite moves. it is like "slipping" and punching. i made sure to use a boxing reference because i know you will love it.

if you learned WCK and understood it, you would know this.

That's all lovely theory. There's no doubt that you have an "idea" of how you believe things should work. Everyone has an "idea". It's not the "idea" that is important but HOW YOU ARRIVED at that idea that is important. Did you arrive at that idea by sparring with quality fighters? Or, did you arrive at it by some other means?

And, while we're at it, why don't you tell me your name and who you trained your WCK with? Thanks. :)

Phil Redmond

08-05-2009, 11:05 AM

All forms deal with inside fighting ?

how do you spar with butterfly knives ? what tactics do you adopt ....curious.:D
We spar with plastic knives. Marty Goldberg made some knives that are used in competitions.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 11:25 AM

You are not going to understand it through my writings -- you need to experience it yourself. This is why I keep asking where you are located? There are various people who have this skill that I can direct you to. If you want to PM me, that's fine.

if this has something to do with the chusauli pelvic thrust then its not SN WC and of course I would not know what you are talking about. Not saying this is incorrect, but this is not what is done in SN WC

If you beleive you know how to do it, then go out and fight/spar with some skilled fighters and see. It won't work as you think it will -- but until you DO THE WORK you won't see.
)

i think i have responded to this same line a zillion times. its getting to the point of G-Bay CIA mental torture techniques to break terrorists or is it just pure asperger...or perhaps it is your method to avoid discussion when you are stuck and get on your pedestal.

And, while we're at it, why don't you tell me your name and who you trained your WCK with? Thanks.

yeah right, like im going to tell my location to rain man over here so he can cut my throat in my sleep.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 11:44 AM

if this has something to do with the chusauli pelvic thrust then its not SN WC and of course I would not know what you are talking about. Not saying this is incorrect, but this is not what is done in SN WC

WCK is WCK, the various branches are just curriculums for teaching the same thing.

i think i have responded to this same line a zillion times. its getting to the point of G-Bay CIA mental torture techniques to break terrorists or is it just pure asperger...or perhaps it is your method to avoid discussion when you are stuck and get on your pedestal.

I keep telling you that because you keep confusing the curriculum (how you learn) with the subject matter (doing it in fighting). If you are not doing it in fighitng, then you don't know.

yeah right, like im going to tell my location to rain man over here so he can cut my throat in my sleep.

WTF are you talking about?

What is your name? Are you afraid to tell people your name?

Who are you training WCK with? Is this some secret?

Where are you? I may be able to have someone show you the things I'm talking about? Are you afraid?

When people won't identify themselves or their teachers, etc. I think it strongly suggests that they have something to hide.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 12:34 PM

good job trying to derail the subject. i was taught by my friend's father for many years. he does not have a website or a school. he taught me only so telling you his name would be meaningless.

WCK is WCK, the various branches are just
curriculums for teaching the same thing.

whoever says WCK is WCK really does not understand their WCK.

all WCK will look similar if you look at videos, but applications of the techniques can be very different.

also, subtle differences in appearance can result in massive difference in application. if you don't understand the focus and application of each technique, you will disregard something small like wrist posture as an insignificant difference

not to mention that different styles have unique techniques. even between yoshiyahu's YKS and my SN lineage, our 12 san sik are quite different

I keep telling you that because you keep confusing the curriculum (how you learn) with the subject matter (doing it in fighting). If you are not doing it in fighitng, then you don't know.

aspergers.

WTF are you talking about?

What is your name? Are you afraid to tell people your name?

Who are you training WCK with? Is this some secret?

Where are you? I may be able to have someone show you the things I'm talking about? Are you afraid?

When people won't identify themselves or their teachers, etc. I think it strongly suggests that they have something to hide.

my name is Jason. how does that change the conversation? every day i train alone as i said my job keeps me on the move, but when i move from place to place every few months i always stop by the local boxing or kickboxing gym to spar.

i was being facetious of course. thanks for the offer, but after this discussion i am 0% interested in learning from people who have taught you.

before this discussion i thought that you might know some stuff but were just arrogant. then i thought...WOW holy sh!t you are just way off the mark because you said you were talking about SN WC. i thought you learned SN WC. but then it turns out you didnt really learn SN WC so I dont know why you claim you know about it.

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 12:54 PM

good job trying to derail the subject. i was taught by my friend's father for many years. he does not have a website or a school. he taught me only so telling you his name would be meaningless.

OK.

Maybe the name wouldn't be meaningless to me -- I have many contacts in the YKS/SN world. Why don't you give me the name and let me decide?

Have you trained with other YKS/SN instructors? Can you tell me who they are?

whoever says WCK is WCK really does not understand their WCK.

all WCK will look similar if you look at videos, but applications of the techniques can be very different.

also, subtle differences in appearance can result in massive difference in application. if you don't understand the focus and application of each technique, you will disregard something small like wrist posture as an insignificant difference

You don't understand the difference between curriculum and the subject matter.

What you call "application" isn't application -- it is what people imagine they will do in fighting. Genuine application is what people actually are doing in fighting. If you see what they are really doing, there isn't much variation.

not to mention that different styles have unique techniques. even between yoshiyahu's YKS and my SN lineage, our 12 san sik are quite different

And that tells me you don't understand the san sik at all -- they are to teach yau dim (important points), and you can use different examples (techniques or san sik) to teach the same yau dim.

BTW, I think that you are yoshiyahu. I am going to ask that your ISP be checked.

my name is Jason. how does that change the conversation? every day i train alone as i said my job keeps me on the move, but when i move from place to place every few months i always stop by the local boxing or kickboxing gym to spar.

Yeah, sure.

i was being facetious of course. thanks for the offer, but after this discussion i am 0% interested in learning from people who have taught you.

before this discussion i thought that you might know some stuff but were just arrogant. then i thought...WOW holy sh!t you are just way off the mark because you said you were talking about SN WC. i thought you learned SN WC. but then it turns out you didnt really learn SN WC so I dont know why you claim you know about it.

WCK is WCK. The turning punch is the turning punch. The kneeling horse is the kneeling horse. The tools of WCK are the tools of WCK. You may know 12 san sik. I know 40, many of which are the same as your 12. BFD.

Knifefighter

08-05-2009, 01:00 PM

good job trying to derail the subject. i was taught by my friend's father for many years. he does not have a website or a school. he taught me only so telling you his name would be meaningless.

every day i train alone as i said my job keeps me on the move, but when i move from place to place every few months i always stop by the local boxing or kickboxing gym to spar.

LOL @ training with some unknown supposed "WC" guy, then training alone in your basement and then telling other people they don't know WC.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 01:05 PM

OK.
Maybe the name wouldn't be meaningless to me -- I have many contacts in the YKS/SN world. Why don't you give me the name and let me decide?

who are you're contacts terrence? i know this is bull**** but I will indulge you. his name is Richard Tom.

Have you trained with other YKS/SN instructors? Can you tell me who they are?

no

You don't understand the difference between curriculum and the subject matter.

What you call "application" isn't application -- it is what people imagine they will do in fighting. Genuine application is what people actually are doing in fighting. If you see what they are really doing, there isn't much variation.

wtf are you talking about. you have no basis for this claim other than your baseless arrogance.

no imagination here buddy. I CHALLENGE YOU TO ANSWER MY PREVIOUS QUESTIONS. why don't you actually answer my questions instead of repeating the same stuff over and over. then at least we can move this conversation along. otherwise you are stalling.

And that tells me you don't understand the san sik at all -- they are to teach yau dim (important points), and you can use different examples (techniques or san sik) to teach the same yau dim.

yes they are to teach different points. you got that one part right. for example, the side punch and kneeling side punch (which are all part of the same san sik)--the point in this san sik is all about evading while striking.

BTW, I think that you are yoshiyahu. I am going to ask that your ISP be checked.

go ahead. you will see that I am not yoshiyahu and my IP will show up from the west coast (and not missouri) because I remotely log into my computer at the office and waste the company's money talking to you.

WCK is WCK. The turning punch is the turning punch. The kneeling horse is the kneeling horse. The tools of WCK are the tools of WCK. You may know 12 san sik. I know 40, many of which are the same as your 12. BFD.

this is exactly my point. you might have learned the same technique, but you didnt learn how to apply it the same as i did.

you learned the turning punch, but you're application is one way. my way is another. im trying to have a debate with you on the issues...but you keep stalling and trying to derail the conversation. i kept avoiding giving out my name etc because wtf does that have to do with anything

so again, i challenge you to answer my previous questions that you ducked...responding with the typical "go fight people and see..." comment.

i mean, seriosuly, if you are going to keep saying that and not DISCUSS anything with anyone. why the fvck even come to this DISCUSSION forum at all.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 01:09 PM

LOL @ training with some unknown supposed "WC" guy, then training alone in your basement and then telling other people they don't know WC.

this comment speaks volumes on your idiocy.

you think things of value are only present when they mainstream? a teacher needs a dot com to be legit? no wonder you only place value in things you see on television.

LOL @ a guy with a 2-1-1 record thinking he is more than he is

t_niehoff

08-05-2009, 01:21 PM

who are you're contacts terrence? i know this is bull**** but I will indulge you. his name is Richard Tom.

OK, and who did Richard Tom learn YKS/SN from?

wtf are you talking about. you have no basis for this claim other than your baseless arrogance.

I am going by what you say -- you keep confusing the curriculum with the subject matter.

no imagination here buddy. I CHALLENGE YOU TO ANSWER MY PREVIOUS QUESTIONS. why don't you actually answer my questions instead of repeating the same stuff over and over. then at least we can move this conversation along. otherwise you are stalling.

I've answered all your questions.

yes they are to teach different points. you got that one part right. for example, the side punch and kneeling side punch (which are all part of the same san sik)--the point in this san sik is all about evading while striking.

No, it's not.

go ahead. you will see that I am not yoshiyahu and my IP will show up from the west coast (and not missouri) because I remotely log into my computer at the office and waste the company's money talking to you.

If you are on the West Coast, I can arrange for you to meet someone that can show you what turning/kneeling is really for? Are you closer to LA or San Diego?

this is exactly my point. you might have learned the same technique, but you didnt learn how to apply it the same as i did.

You didn't learn to apply it.

you learned the turning punch, but you're application is one way. my way is another. im trying to have a debate with you on the issues...but you keep stalling and trying to derail the conversation. i kept avoiding giving out my name etc because wtf does that have to do with anything

I am not saying there is only one right way to use the turning punch, but I am saying that how you describe using it isn't one of them. WCK isn't based on evading attacks. Have you learned the kuit, "stay/remain as he comes, escort him as he goes"?

Pacman

08-05-2009, 01:51 PM

ok tell me the person to see in san diego. i think this is proof that you dont read posts in response btw

I've answered all your questions.

no you have not. there are a few you avoided, but ill try again...and dont give an excuse for not answering. this is a discussion forum so try discussing and not drive by soapboxing

you said your YKJYM involves moving the whole body, but not stepping or turning. ok. then in the same paragraph you said the body is stationary. so what...do you float forward and backwards left and right?

help me understand. describe the motion for me...because the turning was the fundamental movement. btw, if you youtube other sum nung WC videos, you will see this turning too, quite prevalent.

You didn't learn to apply it.

why don't you try supporting your statements, instead of just making them. otherwise its like talking to a brick wall.

why did i not learn to apply it? why is the way i learned wrong?

Have you learned the kuit, "stay/remain as he comes, escort him as he goes"?

not all WC is based on evasion, but it is used in this technique. and btw, what you are referring to in chinese is really more catch/yield to what comes and not stay put. that part of the maxim is basically about not using force to defeat force, and turning your body to evade is yielding.

Yoshiyahu

08-05-2009, 03:44 PM

i agree one would use feints in long to mid range.

yes they are not in the forms because feints and other things that make up a persons personal style (such as a set fighting stance) are left flexible to the practitioner. IMO they are not endorsed or opposed by WC philosophy.

if all fights started in the close range, then yeah you would never use feints in a "street fight"

however this is not always the case. look to the video in the post about the black guy who was attacked by skinheads in canada for a quick example.

i dont understand you say WC has no long range kicks. WC has front kick and side kick (generally up to the chest) which are considered long range.

if traditional Yip sifus do not speak of feints...that is their WC. thats how they choose to fight with their WC knowledge.

i dont think its prohibited by WC fighting philosphies

Pacman: No WC is fighting System. So of course an indiviual fighter can do things that work for him. But I believe Terrence whole point was that Feints are not originally or authenically apart of the WC system. Feints can be use with WC as well as high kicks and jumps. But that doesn't mean that those techniques are the norm for WC. They are something added by an individual. But not actually WC techniques. Do we agree on this Pacman?

As for WC side kick and front kicks. I believe as a rule a kick should not go to far beyond the lower gate. If it goes beyond the lower gate and your attacking someones upper gates with a kick then you may have an issue. Its more risky to kick above the Middle Tan Tien. I suggest Kicks should usually be at lower Dan Tien and below. I do not see WC kicks being endorsed at chest level unless you are actually grabbing and pulling the opponent into the kick with the free arm. To sit there an play the outsiders game is not very encomical in my opinion. The clear agenda would be to bridge the gap, gain entry and attack the hour glass. But this is my opinion I could be wrong about this Pacman please school me if you will. Again its all theory and principal. Like Terrence often says we must test what is proven in fighting. In fighting when someone kicks to my waist level or above I usually attempt to dump them or intercept their kick. So kicking chest level to me is a bad move. But again I can stand to be corrected.

All forms deal with inside fighting ?

how do you spar with butterfly knives ? what tactics do you adopt ....curious.:D

KGledhill: Sparring with butterfly knives are not something I do. Atleast not with real steel butterfly knives. ha ha. But I would suggest drilling defense and attack with butterfly knives against different weapons and unorthodox weapons such as a knive, baseball bat crow bar. Any way. In theory when you see the Bart Cham Dao form you will notice that WC Swords are not for long range attacks. The defense is agaist long range but the attacks for very short range. Look at the stance work. It doesn't allow you to over extend or strecth out the body like in hung gar short swords. WC Short Swords is very subtle and reserved. The key to WC short swords in theory is to trap your opponents weapon when he over commits or control his weapon. Once you have control and bridge the gap you should gain entry and attack. Its all about timing to gain entry and end the fight quickly. But I am not up for sparring with the Knives myself yet. I rather watch others do it for now. just cautious. Even the knives I got which are unsharpen hurt like hell if you make a mistake. Oh yea I made mistakes with it. No cuts but alot of pain. I am glad as hell they werent sharpen when Sifu let me use them. I was out side messing around with them going over the form. An doing some solidary drills. A buddy of mines was out side playing with him. When he went inside for a moment i was monkeying around with them half serious an drop one blade on leg. Talk about pain. The Short Swords my Sifu got is heavy fraking combat steel. Again unsharpen but hurt like a mother fraker. I put some dit da jow on it right away. Its cool today. Just sting slightly but no pain really.

So as for sparring with short swords. No buddy not me. But if i ever buy some wooden ones then yes maybe.

Disclaimer: Oh let me reclarify something for you too. I just thought about. Technically the pole form is long fighting. Especially if you have a long pole that is Nine feet long. But the Mook Jong Form is design for fighting close and moving around your opponent, SLT is about fighting on the inside and training each hand indivually and then two hands at once. Chum Kiu (sinking Bridge or seeking the Bridge). Is use to fight on the inside. You bridge the gap with the steps. Turning is also for inside. Bil Gee deal with Elbow release and Elbow strikes as well hooks and release from body grab and several inside hand defense techniques.

Pacman

08-05-2009, 03:55 PM

yoshi

i agree that feints are not explicitly part of the WC system as defined by the forms. as i said they are neither explicitly endorsed or prohibited. but terrence believes it is prohibited. suggesting that it conflicts with WC principles. i say it does not.

regarding kicks. sorry i dont know why i said chest. i meant abdomen. we were talking about WCs supposed lack of long range. any kick that you can make to the abdomen is long range. in fact, assuming that you're opponent and you and your opponent have no great height disparity, a kick to the abdomen is the longest range kick you can have because your leg is going straight out. kicks to the head or to the lower legs are actually shorter.

Liddel

08-05-2009, 04:05 PM

I believe Terrence whole point was that Feints are not originally or authenically apart of the WC system. Feints can be use with WC as well as high kicks and jumps. But that doesn't mean that those techniques are the norm for WC.

They are something added by an individual. But not actually WC techniques.

Dude the whole system was added and complied by individuals and the weapons were added later also making this point moot.

Feint /feɪnt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [feynt] Show IPA

–noun 1. a movement made in order to deceive an adversary; an attack aimed at one place or point merely as a distraction from the real place or point of attack: military feints; the feints of a skilled fencer.

There are many actions i was taught in VT Chi sau all the way through Gor and Lux Sau to sparring that fit this very description. So its in MY VT. Especially in a contact fighting system with an emphasis on feeling and sensitivity etc. See my Poon Sau example in my last post !

2. a feigned or assumed appearance: His air of approval was a feint to conceal his real motives.

The BJD specifically for ME is held in a way (its pose if you will) so that it opens a space on the body where by an opponent would see and wish to attack that area making it easier for you to defend against.

Its similar to japanese sward play strategies where the sword is held high over ones head in a pose - opening the whole torso up to draw the opponent into attacking that area....

and clearly its in fencing also as it seems to be included in the dictionary's description above :rolleyes: :o :cool:

DREW

Yoshiyahu

08-05-2009, 06:36 PM

yoshi

I agree that feints are not explicitly part of the WC system as defined by the forms. as I said they are neither explicitly endorsed or prohibited. but terrence believes it is prohibited. suggesting that it conflicts with WC principles. i say it does not.

regarding kicks. sorry i dont know why i said chest. i meant abdomen. we were talking about WCs supposed lack of long range. any kick that you can make to the abdomen is long range. in fact, assuming that you're opponent and you and your opponent have no great height disparity, a kick to the abdomen is the longest range kick you can have because your leg is going straight out. kicks to the head or to the lower legs are actually shorter.

Oh Pacman...Well there in lies are disagreement.

I suppose we are at impasse that only Terrence Niehoff can clarify for us. I don't think that Terrence is saying Feints conflict with WC principles at all. I think T's Point is that feints aren't apart of the Real WC curriculm.

Terrence Niehoff Qoutes:
Typically, feinting has not been a part of the WCK curriculum-- it's not in the forms, the drills, talked about in the kuit, etc. And, that's because feints are not a big part of an inside game, and even less a part of an attached game. Feints mainly play a part on the outside, and then only when facing well-skilled fighters.

Terrence Niehoff Qoutes:
I said that feints are not a part of the WCK curriculum. How you use your WCK is up to you.

Terrence Niehoff Qoutes:
Feints are like any other tool/tactic. You need to learn when -- the proper tactical context -- to use them. You learn that BY FIGHTING, by seeing for yourself when they work, when they don't, etc. Everything else is theory, is guesswork. I've shared my observations from my experience fighting/sparring.

Pacman: Do you think Feints will work on unskilled fighter who simply attacks continously an has no basic defense. He doesn't defend or move away he just keeps charging you swinging wild relentlessly?

As for kicks in my opinion a kick to abs is a mid range kick at best....

Thanks Liddel for your opinion! Question though? How do you feint a person who aggressively attacks you and jam your space? How do you feint someone who sticks to you like glue or white on rice?

russellsherry

08-05-2009, 06:43 PM

hi guys i go along with what dave peterson says treat all attacks as attacks the same and regardless weather there fakeing or feiting treat it the same in a fight hit first and last don't worry what he is going to do let him worry about what your going to the person whom gets the first one in always nearly wins .not always but nearly always regrds russellsherry

k gledhill

08-05-2009, 06:55 PM

Pacman: No WC is fighting System. So of course an indiviual fighter can do things that work for him. But I believe Terrence whole point was that Feints are not originally or authenically apart of the WC system. Feints can be use with WC as well as high kicks and jumps. But that doesn't mean that those techniques are the norm for WC. They are something added by an individual. But not actually WC techniques. Do we agree on this Pacman?

As for WC side kick and front kicks. I believe as a rule a kick should not go to far beyond the lower gate. If it goes beyond the lower gate and your attacking someones upper gates with a kick then you may have an issue. Its more risky to kick above the Middle Tan Tien. I suggest Kicks should usually be at lower Dan Tien and below. I do not see WC kicks being endorsed at chest level unless you are actually grabbing and pulling the opponent into the kick with the free arm. To sit there an play the outsiders game is not very encomical in my opinion. The clear agenda would be to bridge the gap, gain entry and attack the hour glass. But this is my opinion I could be wrong about this Pacman please school me if you will. Again its all theory and principal. Like Terrence often says we must test what is proven in fighting. In fighting when someone kicks to my waist level or above I usually attempt to dump them or intercept their kick. So kicking chest level to me is a bad move. But again I can stand to be corrected.

KGledhill: Sparring with butterfly knives are not something I do. Atleast not with real steel butterfly knives. ha ha. But I would suggest drilling defense and attack with butterfly knives against different weapons and unorthodox weapons such as a knive, baseball bat crow bar. Any way. In theory when you see the Bart Cham Dao form you will notice that WC Swords are not for long range attacks. The defense is agaist long range but the attacks for very short range. Look at the stance work. It doesn't allow you to over extend or strecth out the body like in hung gar short swords. WC Short Swords is very subtle and reserved. The key to WC short swords in theory is to trap your opponents weapon when he over commits or control his weapon. Once you have control and bridge the gap you should gain entry and attack. Its all about timing to gain entry and end the fight quickly. But I am not up for sparring with the Knives myself yet. I rather watch others do it for now. just cautious. Even the knives I got which are unsharpen hurt like hell if you make a mistake. Oh yea I made mistakes with it. No cuts but alot of pain. I am glad as hell they werent sharpen when Sifu let me use them. I was out side messing around with them going over the form. An doing some solidary drills. A buddy of mines was out side playing with him. When he went inside for a moment i was monkeying around with them half serious an drop one blade on leg. Talk about pain. The Short Swords my Sifu got is heavy fraking combat steel. Again unsharpen but hurt like a mother fraker. I put some dit da jow on it right away. Its cool today. Just sting slightly but no pain really.

So as for sparring with short swords. No buddy not me. But if i ever buy some wooden ones then yes maybe.

Disclaimer: Oh let me reclarify something for you too. I just thought about. Technically the pole form is long fighting. Especially if you have a long pole that is Nine feet long. But the Mook Jong Form is design for fighting close and moving around your opponent, SLT is about fighting on the inside and training each hand indivually and then two hands at once. Chum Kiu (sinking Bridge or seeking the Bridge). Is use to fight on the inside. You bridge the gap with the steps. Turning is also for inside. Bil Gee deal with Elbow release and Elbow strikes as well hooks and release from body grab and several inside hand defense techniques.

wiaiting for T..thanks:D

Yoshiyahu

08-05-2009, 07:22 PM

wiaiting for T..thanks:D

aww i got confused...what you mean???

Waiting for T...you may wait for a while then?

Pacman

08-05-2009, 11:16 PM

Oh Pacman...Well there in lies are disagreement.

I suppose we are at impasse that only Terrence Niehoff can clarify for us. I don't think that Terrence is saying Feints conflict with WC principles at all. I think T's Point is that feints aren't apart of the Real WC curriculm.

i took it as he is saying WC is mainly an inside game (which i disagree with), and thus feints are unnatural for the art. well whatever he said, you know my views.

Pacman: Do you think Feints will work on unskilled fighter who simply attacks continously an has no basic defense. He doesn't defend or move away he just keeps charging you swinging wild relentlessly?

a feint will actually create less of a reaction in a seasoned fighter. an unskilled fighter will have a greater reaction to your feint due to the fact that he is probably less relaxed and not used to things.

all we need an opponent to do is to react somehow. a flinch. something. feints and jabs are for probing your opponent to see what he will do.

obviously you do not throw a feint when he is 6 inches away swinging wildly...but what about when he starts coming close. throw a feint at his face. if that creates an opening, use it to your advantage.

As for kicks in my opinion a kick to abs is a mid range kick at best....

then what is a long range kick?

k gledhill

08-06-2009, 05:25 AM

aww i got confused...what you mean???

Waiting for T...you may wait for a while then?

not the first time he doesnt answer stuff.....There's some new P Bayer posted in a link on another thread ...btw

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 06:48 AM

wiaiting for T..thanks:D

I don't understand.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 08:27 AM

I don't understand.

my questions? answer them? yes. no?

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 08:52 AM

my questions? answer them? yes. no?

What questions?

Pacman

08-06-2009, 01:29 PM

What questions?

i knew it. you dont read responses. all a part of you're drive by commenting

look to this post:

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=952288&postcount=79

t_niehoff

08-06-2009, 03:09 PM

ok tell me the person to see in san diego. i think this is proof that you dont read posts in response btw

Dave McKinnon.

you said your YKJYM involves moving the whole body, but not stepping or turning. ok. then in the same paragraph you said the body is stationary. so what...do you float forward and backwards left and right?

help me understand. describe the motion for me...because the turning was the fundamental movement. btw, if you youtube other sum nung WC videos, you will see this turning too, quite prevalent.

It won't do any good for me to describe it -- you need to see and feel it. Dave McKinnon knows it, he can show it to you. Or, you can get Alan's DVDs (though that's not as good as experiencing it).

You are wrapped up in lineages. Lineage is just a way of teaching WCK; it's all WCK. You talk about what Sum does -- have you seen him actually use -- apply -- WCK? No. Have you seen or felt him in person? No.

why don't you try supporting your statements, instead of just making them. otherwise its like talking to a brick wall.

why did i not learn to apply it? why is the way i learned wrong?

Because you only learn to apply WCK by applying (fighting with) it. And I can tell by what you say that you are not fighting with it -- things like using the WCK turning to evade. That won't work.

not all WC is based on evasion, but it is used in this technique. and btw, what you are referring to in chinese is really more catch/yield to what comes and not stay put. that part of the maxim is basically about not using force to defeat force, and turning your body to evade is yielding.

Evasion is a very, very small part of WCK (a minor tactic). Lai Loa (stay or remain as he comes) does not refer to dodging or evading or yeilding -- otherwise the kuit would say dodge or evade or yeild when he comes. If you learned SN WCK, then you learned that Sum used to say it isn't "not using force against force" (you have to when you fight) but "using smart force to overcome dumb force."

Yoshiyahu

08-06-2009, 03:51 PM

WC is short range style

i took it as he is saying WC is mainly an inside game (which i disagree with),

Wing Chun is an Inisde fighting art?

Words such as "Short Range Combat" or "Inside Fighting" or "Close Range Fighting" are used for WC. Wing Chun is not a Long Style of Fighting like Long Fist.

Mostly Northern Styles are typically Long Range Fighting Styles.

While Styles that are considered Southrern are more Close Range styles.

A long Style uses Mostly Feet and attack from the outside to wear you down or knock you out.

A Short Range Style Uses mostly the Hands and attempt to gain entry and destroy you from the inside.

http://www.usadojo.com/styles/about-kung-fu-styles.htm

Northern Shaolin

With the original Shaolin Temple in Northern China long since destroyed, the main branches of Shaolin Kung Fu spread far and wide through China, undergoing many revisions and adaptations. The present system, known as Northern Shaolin, specializes in long-range fighting techniques. Based on some of the original temple boxing heritage, the proponents of this system maintain that kicks are more effective than hand movements because the legs obviously are longer than the arms.
-Taken from "KUNG FU: History, Philosophy and Technique"

Wing Chun

The essence of Wing Chun, in Chinese terms, is "Opponent attacks, absorb and neutralize blow. Opponent withdraws, pursue and counter. Disengage restriction from arms, retaliate with penetrating thrust." This will take some time to understand and a lot of practical application to master. Technically, Wing Chun uses a constant flow of forward energy based on the principle that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Offensively, a Wing Chun artist will use a combination of straight and intercepting lines and deflecting arcs. We emphasize the word "offense" because Wing Chun is structurally an aggressive close-quarter style which, as a modern Wing Chun practitioner told us, "Doesn't give a **** about traditional block and punch routines."

-Taken from "KUNG FU: History, Philosophy and Technique"

Remember Wong Shun Leung has a video called "Wing Chun the Science of Infighting."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYm3hq1oD2w

Examples of long Range fighting in contrast to short Range

http://books.google.com/books?id=nZ_-JoukHt4C&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=short-range+styles+of+kung+fu&source=bl&ots=bA5WhfJyIQ&sig=XZ4WKxEeiiHJM9ksaaCNHJY4OTg&hl=en&ei=mV97SvivOYviMYPjmfIC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Pacman

08-06-2009, 04:11 PM

Dave McKinnon.
It won't do any good for me to describe it -- you need to see and feel it. Dave McKinnon knows it, he can show it to you. Or, you can get Alan's DVDs (though that's not as good as experiencing it).

why wouldnt it help?

you know its very unlikely that a person is going to take his time to travel hours away so that he can settle a debate on an internet forum. just answer this simple question:

if the torso, hips, etc. are moving. in what direction are they moving? up? down? forward? backward? left? right?

if you learned this from robert chu then maybe he can answer.

You are wrapped up in lineages. Lineage is just a way of teaching WCK; it's all WCK.

its not a pride thing. facts are a stubborn thing. the fact is, different lineages have significant differences. everyone adds or subtracts from what they learned from their sifu. over time, it is inevitable that there will be differences.

You talk about what Sum does -- have you seen him actually use -- apply -- WCK? No. Have you seen or felt him in person? No.

see. another dumba@$$ and baseless assumption. yes i did meet him before he died on two occassions.

but whether i did or not is pointless. i am talking about what SN WC is, not SN himself. If you have a different interpretation of what SN WC is then that is fine. we can discuss the ISSUES. i have no problem with that.

Because you only learn to apply WCK by applying (fighting with) it. And I can tell by what you say that you are not fighting with it -- things like using the WCK turning to evade. That won't work.

tell me why it won't work. dont say "go out and try it". i have. i have seen it work first hand and from third person experience. since you have tried it, why dont you explain in words. you are obviously an articulate person, there should be no problem explaining. if you cannot verbalize then it can only show that you do not your own claim

Evasion is a very, very small part of WCK (a minor tactic). Lai Loa (stay or remain as he comes) does not refer to dodging or evading or yeilding -- otherwise the kuit would say dodge or evade or yeild when he comes.

i never said it was a huge part. i just said that was the point of that particular san sik.

regarding the kuen kuit in englsih--have you ever heard of problems with translation?

If you learned SN WCK, then you learned that Sum used to say it isn't "not using force against force" (you have to when you fight) but "using smart force to overcome dumb force."

when i say force against force that means using force in direct opposition to an incoming force to defeat it. an example is pushing back against someone who is pushing on you. in this case, your success is completely dependent on you having the larger force.

the terms soft and yielding do not mean that you have absolutely no strength whatsoever. it means that you use your force wisely...and use only enough to overcome. if someone pushes against you, don't just push back like an idiot. a possible solution would be to redirect his force away from you.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 04:15 PM

Yoshiyahu

08-06-2009, 05:43 PM

you misunderstand or perhaps my fault i wasn't very clear

WC's specialty is short range fighting yes. but i dispute the claim that WC has no outside game, i.e. no way for a WC practitioner to be able to fight on the outside first

it would be ridiculous for WC contributors/creators to design a style where the fight had to start where the two opponents are standing 6 inches away from each other.

there has to be a plan for fighting from the outside to get to the inside.

Actually I thought I stated the above in another Post. WC is is exclusively and short range fighting style. BJJ is Exclusively a Ground Fighting system. WC has the tools needed to gain entry to inside. In fact WC defensives are design to allow you to neutralize or deflect a long range attack. Every time you intercept an attack you have just bridge. Once a Bridge is established then the Gap is closed. From the bridge you are connected or in sticking range. From sticking you may begin to control and trap your opponent. Deflection and Counter attack are done in one motion at this point. Flow from each movement like water flows relentlessly.

WC is an inside Fighting game. But if you wish to adopt it to outside fighting you will need to cross your WC with another system to make it effective on the outside. Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do is good fusion of outside fighting and inside fighting. WC concepts mixed with Long Range Shaolin Kicks. Also your steps from YKS will have to change to as well. You will need to move around alot more on the outside and widen your stance slightly. You may utilize dancing like a boxer to help in this endeavor. But always realize what your doing is mixing another style with your WC. An those techniques are not WC techniques at all. So you can fight with WC on outside. But you will need outside fighting skills to do so. Because true WC is most effective on the inside. But you can modify WC deflection to be use on the outside with Western Boxing foot work or Kickboxing foot work.

This is the reason why Terrence says that WC people fighting long range look like kick boxers. Because if you fight non-traditionally then you are kickboxing with WC principals and Deflection. But the WC principals do not kick in until you gain a bridge. So until a bridge is establish everything else is mere kickboxing. WC works of from the bridge!

Pacman

08-06-2009, 06:04 PM

what can i say except i disagree fundamentally with just about everything you define in WC.

ill just talk about one of the things you mentioned because im a bit tired now

footwork

people confuse the stepping patterns you learn for the wooden dummy and think that WC restricts you in a fight to those patterns

people do the same with the WC horse stance, thinking you are limited to fighting in the horse stance

training the horse stance teaches you about structure and turning in the horse for evasion/power generation etc., but that does not mean you need to fight frozen in that stance.

stepping patterns have their own benefits

these two things, like many other things in WC, are just tools for you to use. the horse stance allows you to do such and such. the stepping gives you so and so benefits. they do not restrict you in any way. you are not required to only have that stance or to only step in that way, but feel free to get into the stance when needed or to utilize specific footwork when needed

often, people get the wrong idea about these tools and pass on this misunderstanding. its usually a result of not actually fighting enough (terrence is happy).

then come people like you who train hard and fight against others, and you realize "this doesnt work" and then you try figure out for yourself how to make it work

for the other things, lets just agree to disagree or maybe i will write about it later.

Actually I thought I stated the above in another Post. WC is is exclusively and short range fighting style. BJJ is Exclusively a Ground Fighting system. WC has the tools needed to gain entry to inside. In fact WC defensives are design to allow you to neutralize or deflect a long range attack. Every time you intercept an attack you have just bridge. Once a Bridge is established then the Gap is closed. From the bridge you are connected or in sticking range. From sticking you may begin to control and trap your opponent. Deflection and Counter attack are done in one motion at this point. Flow from each movement like water flows relentlessly.

WC is an inside Fighting game. But if you wish to adopt it to outside fighting you will need to cross your WC with another system to make it effective on the outside. Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do is good fusion of outside fighting and inside fighting. WC concepts mixed with Long Range Shaolin Kicks. Also your steps from YKS will have to change to as well. You will need to move around alot more on the outside and widen your stance slightly. You may utilize dancing like a boxer to help in this endeavor. But always realize what your doing is mixing another style with your WC. An those techniques are not WC techniques at all. So you can fight with WC on outside. But you will need outside fighting skills to do so. Because true WC is most effective on the inside. But you can modify WC deflection to be use on the outside with Western Boxing foot work or Kickboxing foot work.

This is the reason why Terrence says that WC people fighting long range look like kick boxers. Because if you fight non-traditionally then you are kickboxing with WC principals and Deflection. But the WC principals do not kick in until you gain a bridge. So until a bridge is establish everything else is mere kickboxing. WC works of from the bridge!

Yoshiyahu

08-06-2009, 06:52 PM

I agree with you...Of course you can modify the stance and techniques to fight on the outside. I do this too. When I spar I mix it up. I use non-static posture and footwork, I keep moving, I throw different sorted kicks, I use feints and different ways of punching and attacking. I move in and out of range to confuse my opponent. I grab, Jerk and step to outer flanks to attack.

These are just methods I devised from fighting different people of different sizes. But I have also discovered the reason for WC stances and footwork. Its simple.

Has anyone did any Table Fighting????

Anyway the WC steps are just like the elbows, They work best inside or close. The Mook Jong steps as they are work when your that close to an opponent. But we actually agree.

what can i say except i disagree fundamentally with just about everything you define in WC.

ill just talk about one of the things you mentioned because im a bit tired now

footwork

people confuse the stepping patterns you learn for the wooden dummy and think that WC restricts you in a fight to those patterns

people do the same with the WC horse stance, thinking you are limited to fighting in the horse stance

training the horse stance teaches you about structure and turning in the horse for evasion/power generation etc., but that does not mean you need to fight frozen in that stance.

stepping patterns have their own benefits

these two things, like many other things in WC, are just tools for you to use. the horse stance allows you to do such and such. the stepping gives you so and so benefits. they do not restrict you in any way. you are not required to only have that stance or to only step in that way, but feel free to get into the stance when needed or to utilize specific footwork when needed

often, people get the wrong idea about these tools and pass on this misunderstanding. its usually a result of not actually fighting enough (terrence is happy).

then come people like you who train hard and fight against others, and you realize "this doesnt work" and then you try figure out for yourself how to make it work

for the other things, lets just agree to disagree or maybe i will write about it later.

Pacman

08-06-2009, 09:55 PM

ok maybe i misunderstood you. when you said you had to use western boxing footwork or kickboxing footwork to make WC work on the outside, it makes it sound like WC is not meant to be used from the outside. and thats where i disagreed

t_niehoff

08-07-2009, 06:50 AM

why wouldnt it help?

you know its very unlikely that a person is going to take his time to travel hours away so that he can settle a debate on an internet forum. just answer this simple question:

if the torso, hips, etc. are moving. in what direction are they moving? up? down? forward? backward? left? right?

if you learned this from robert chu then maybe he can answer.

The problem is in trying to describe a very complex body mechanic in words -- saying how the hips move won't explain it because so many parts (the whole body) needs to work together in a very specific way.

That's why I suggested you see Dave -- he can do it.

its not a pride thing. facts are a stubborn thing. the fact is, different lineages have significant differences. everyone adds or subtracts from what they learned from their sifu. over time, it is inevitable that there will be differences.

Those "differences" are inconsequential -- they mainly arise either in how something is taught or in fantasy application. How things really will work under high pressure (of fighting) isn't that variable.

see. another dumba@$$ and baseless assumption. yes i did meet him before he died on two occassions.

but whether i did or not is pointless. i am talking about what SN WC is, not SN himself. If you have a different interpretation of what SN WC is then that is fine. we can discuss the ISSUES. i have no problem with that.

If you met Sum, did you train with him?

SN WCK is simply how Sum taught WCK -- it is his curriculum for teaching. That's it. How WCK is taught is not how it is applied.

tell me why it won't work. dont say "go out and try it". i have. i have seen it work first hand and from third person experience. since you have tried it, why dont you explain in words. you are obviously an articulate person, there should be no problem explaining. if you cannot verbalize then it can only show that you do not your own claim

A person can do all kinds of things under low pressure (when not hard pressed) and against scrubs -- that is not a good test of whether something is sound or valid. The mechanics of the WCK turn is too slow to use as a dodge or evasion -- if you fight going 100%. This is why boxers don't move like that. The WCK turn isn't a slip, for instance.

i never said it was a huge part. i just said that was the point of that particular san sik.

The WCK turing itself won't work as a dodge or evasion, it is too slow. It works when you arein contact and attached to break an opponent's structure.

regarding the kuen kuit in englsih--have you ever heard of problems with translation?

But you can look up the characters for the kuit and see that they do have definite meanings. As I said, the kuit "lai lao" refers to staying or remaining or meeting, not dodging or evading. Similarly, the very first keyword of the faat (the method of WCK) is dap, to join or ride. That faat and keyword is a part of Sum's curriculum. Sum's curriculum also includes the dap sao drill. Did you learn this stuff?

when i say force against force that means using force in direct opposition to an incoming force to defeat it. an example is pushing back against someone who is pushing on you. in this case, your success is completely dependent on you having the larger force.

Sum said to use a smart force against a dumb force. Did you learn that or not? If my smart force is stronger than his dumb force, then I can overcome his dumb force.

the terms soft and yielding do not mean that you have absolutely no strength whatsoever. it means that you use your force wisely...and use only enough to overcome. if someone pushes against you, don't just push back like an idiot. a possible solution would be to redirect his force away from you.

Sum had a set of keywords that summarized his method, did you learn them? Evasion and yeilding were not among them.

chusauli

08-07-2009, 07:24 AM

You guys can search my site for my old article on Body structure...I don't have much time these days, and I don't feel like typing all of it again.

I also have an open door for anyone who calls me and wants to visit me in Los Angeles Chinatown Friday nights 7 - 9 pm, just call ahead.

IMO, and I speculate, the Opera founders were familiar with many systems before they synthesized/advanced WCK. When you learn Opera, there is a component of learning Northern Fist (See "Farewell my Concubine"), and probably knew Hung Kuen (the predecessor of Hung Ga, Choy Lay Fut, and other Nam Kuen) and they already knew how to bridge from long distance.

WCK at a distance is basically everything thrown at you is an opportunity to bridge, and that anything you absorb will get you into short range. Sometimes you will eat a blow to get into close range, but then, we shear and smother forces with our structure and incoming steps (which, in agreement with Kevin, the Baat Jaam Dao shows us some of the footwork used at long distance, albeit in a fixed way).

Hawkins is great at long distance and this is his specialty. His advice is "if there's a fire, you don't worry about what steps you take, you just get out of the house!" Opponents teach you to move, so one has to test their WCK against all opponents. Its okay to add tools to your personal arsenal to enter. Basically, from my analysis of Hawkins' stories about Bruce Lee is that basically JKD is Bruce's Pak Da - Pak Da is the major tool of entry, then you can use your WCK in contact.

All of you who add other tools is fine, just keep your WCK pure. For example, Alan Orr and my grandstudents use WCK for standing and get their power from the WCK power base, but in MMA, if you go to the ground, you need BJJ and wrestling. That's just the way it is.

All of this is just my opinion.

Best regards,

Knifefighter

08-07-2009, 09:13 AM

people confuse the stepping patterns you learn for the wooden dummy and think that WC restricts you in a fight to those patterns

people do the same with the WC horse stance, thinking you are limited to fighting in the horse stance

training the horse stance teaches you about structure and turning in the horse for evasion/power generation etc., but that does not mean you need to fight frozen in that stance.
If you are training footwork/stances that are different than what you will use in actual application, not only are you wasting your time, you are making yourself worse, rather than better.

Pacman

08-07-2009, 09:54 AM

If you are training footwork/stances that are different than what you will use in actual application, not only are you wasting your time, you are making yourself worse, rather than better.

chalk up another smart analysis by dale.

reading comprehension. the footwork/stances can and are used, but you dont utilize it for every situation.

its like learning elbow strikes and then thinking you have to always use it--using it when you are 5 feet away.

Yoshiyahu

08-07-2009, 11:17 AM

chalk up another smart analysis by dale.

reading comprehension. the footwork/stances can and are used, but you dont utilize it for every situation.

its like learning elbow strikes and then thinking you have to always use it--using it when you are 5 feet away.

From Three feet away what techniques would you use?

Pacman

08-07-2009, 11:31 AM

The problem is in trying to describe a very complex body mechanic in words -- saying how the hips move won't explain it because so many parts (the whole body) needs to work together in a very specific way.

That's why I suggested you see Dave -- he can do it.

why dont you just try?

im really not going to drive for hours to see this guy and possible pay too. let me just tell you that up front

you dont really need to go into detail. you just need to reconcile your conflicting statements. you said that the body is static. then in the same paragraph you said the whole body moves.

robert put it into words. if you cant, that would lead one to believe that you lack the full understanding

Those "differences" are inconsequential -- they mainly arise either in how something is taught or in fantasy application. How things really will work under high pressure (of fighting) isn't that variable.

so some of the moves that are present in SN WC that are not in YM WC (turning YJKJM, turning punch, arrow punch, flapping wing palm, etc.) are inconsequential? they are all fantasy?

speaking of fantasy, could you please reconcile your other conflicting statements? you've said chi sau is fantasy. then you said that 12 san sik are for contact fighting and that its your primary fighting style.

If you met Sum, did you train with him?

i trained with him twice when visiting because he is in my KF family. i do not claim to be his direct student. anyways this is irrelevant because the only reason i brought up that fact was that you made one of your usual know nothing assertions that i have never met him or seen him.

SN WCK is simply how Sum taught WCK -- it is his curriculum for teaching. That's it. How WCK is taught is not how it is applied.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Besides the movements that are not in other WC lineages (and the movements that are in other lineages not in SN WC) HOW IT IS TAUGHT IS ALL ABOUT HOW IT IS APPLIED.

just look at yourself. we both learned the turning punch. you think its for application this way, i think its application is the other way.

A person can do all kinds of things under low pressure (when not hard pressed) and against scrubs -- that is not a good test of whether something is sound or valid. The mechanics of the WCK turn is too slow to use as a dodge or evasion -- if you fight going 100%. This is why boxers don't move like that. The WCK turn isn't a slip, for instance.

your logic again is flawed. your reasoning is not the only reason why boxers dont move like that. anyways, i really dont think you understand how SN WC practioners turn to begin with so we are probably discussing different things anyways

But you can look up the characters for the kuit and see that they do have definite meanings. As I said, the kuit "lai lao" refers to staying or remaining or meeting, not dodging or evading.

as im sure you know, it is not always possible to translate from one language perfectly into another language. you can look up the english definition of a chinese word and the dictionary will do its best to map the chinese word into english words, but it is not always possible. at times there are words with no direct exact translation.

all i can tell you is that "loy lau hui sung" refers to yielding and interception. i speak chinese, i am very sure of this one

Sum said to use a smart force against a dumb force. Did you learn that or not? If my smart force is stronger than his dumb force, then I can overcome his dumb force.

i never heard this quote of his. please tell me why directly opposing a force (like pushing back when someone pushes on you) is a smart force while his is a dumb force? what makes your force smart?

WC is all about finding the path of least resistance, so pushing back against the most difficult path seems pretty dumb to me

Sum had a set of keywords that summarized his method, did you learn them? Evasion and yeilding were not among them.

like i said. evasion is the point of that particular san sik (second from the left http://www.wingchunkuen.com/sumnung/articles/article_ritchie02_01.jpg) and not the whole system

chusauli

08-07-2009, 02:31 PM

k gledhill

08-07-2009, 05:27 PM

Translations are relative.....there are many out there.

A lot of guys try to make sense of the 'whole' idea with only parts...some they made up and tried to make them 'fit' their thinking....

There are some remarkable similarities of structure, that are 'poles apart' from the 'translations'

tan sao never leaves the centerline in the SLT , nor does Jum, but somehow they get translated into tan hand leaves to chase off the line, rather than 'elbow' spreads off the line as the fist strikes...etc...

Tactically guided by an even lesser known knife idea.....

Blind leading the blind...

Pacman

08-07-2009, 10:33 PM

Pacman,

Better look at the characters for "Lai Lou Hui Soong"

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=Encyclopedia&op=content&tid=5

Speaking Chinese or not, you may not understand Chinese martial terminology. I speak Chinese to many students who speak Cantonese or Mandarin, yet they do not understand the terms in a martial context.

I translate it as, "When the opponent arrives (comes), you receive him; As he leaves, you escort him". You are not yielding here, you are greeting him. Perhaps this can be thought of as interception, but certainly not yielding.

the whole point of this discussion originally "was what was the point of this one particular san sik from SN WC".

we could discuss for days what "stay" in the kuen kuit actually defines in the context of fighting all day. to me, it means do not retreat, do not move backwards. in WC we intercept attacks with "yielding force", we do not meet force head on

and to me, moving a few inches to evade a fist does not mean you are "leaving". because the san sik involves this and simultaneously attacking i still see that as engaging with your opponent as he comes

WCK's basic requirement is you have an alive power in YJKYM. You do not have to shift. You have proper alignment.

well if thats what you teach in your Kulo/Yip Man hybrid system thats fine, but we were speaking from the context of SN WC. structure is just as important as it is in YM WC, but we do have the turning incorporated into it which some other lineages do not

It is not static, it is adjusting with your opponent. You cannot get that standing like a hunchback or drug addict needing a fix.

thats funny because SN WC is a hunchbacked style. combine that with keeping your elbows in and you look like you are an old man about to croak.

Ultimatewingchun

08-08-2009, 12:34 AM

I think Robert just told you (without actually telling you :p)...what he really thinks of the SN stance.

And btw, this thread is hilarious! :D

Pacman

08-08-2009, 03:02 AM

since when does anyone stay on topic? haha

Pacman

08-10-2009, 08:08 PM

nothing? i guess you dont understand your own wc

why dont you just try?

im really not going to drive for hours to see this guy and possible pay too. let me just tell you that up front

you dont really need to go into detail. you just need to reconcile your conflicting statements. you said that the body is static. then in the same paragraph you said the whole body moves.

robert put it into words. if you cant, that would lead one to believe that you lack the full understanding

so some of the moves that are present in SN WC that are not in YM WC (turning YJKJM, turning punch, arrow punch, flapping wing palm, etc.) are inconsequential? they are all fantasy?

speaking of fantasy, could you please reconcile your other conflicting statements? you've said chi sau is fantasy. then you said that 12 san sik are for contact fighting and that its your primary fighting style.

i trained with him twice when visiting because he is in my KF family. i do not claim to be his direct student. anyways this is irrelevant because the only reason i brought up that fact was that you made one of your usual know nothing assertions that i have never met him or seen him.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Besides the movements that are not in other WC lineages (and the movements that are in other lineages not in SN WC) HOW IT IS TAUGHT IS ALL ABOUT HOW IT IS APPLIED.

just look at yourself. we both learned the turning punch. you think its for application this way, i think its application is the other way.

your logic again is flawed. your reasoning is not the only reason why boxers dont move like that. anyways, i really dont think you understand how SN WC practioners turn to begin with so we are probably discussing different things anyways

as im sure you know, it is not always possible to translate from one language perfectly into another language. you can look up the english definition of a chinese word and the dictionary will do its best to map the chinese word into english words, but it is not always possible. at times there are words with no direct exact translation.

all i can tell you is that "loy lau hui sung" refers to yielding and interception. i speak chinese, i am very sure of this one

i never heard this quote of his. please tell me why directly opposing a force (like pushing back when someone pushes on you) is a smart force while his is a dumb force? what makes your force smart?

WC is all about finding the path of least resistance, so pushing back against the most difficult path seems pretty dumb to me

like i said. evasion is the point of that particular san sik (second from the left http://www.wingchunkuen.com/sumnung/articles/article_ritchie02_01.jpg) and not the whole system

Ultimatewingchun

08-10-2009, 09:33 PM

What a shock, huh Pacman? :D

Btw, there are some quotes below my signature that you.....might....want....to....take...a look....at..........

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ;)

Yoshiyahu

08-11-2009, 02:37 PM

What do you think of YKS stance???

What a shock, huh Pacman? :D

Btw, there are some quotes below my signature that you.....might....want....to....take...a look....at..........

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ;)

dnovice

08-11-2009, 04:33 PM

lol. just duke it out guys:cool:

my opinion from experience: feints work at the right time... they don't always work but when they do it's a beautiful thing.

t_niehoff

08-12-2009, 11:15 AM

why dont you just try?

im really not going to drive for hours to see this guy and possible pay too. let me just tell you that up front

you dont really need to go into detail. you just need to reconcile your conflicting statements. you said that the body is static. then in the same paragraph you said the whole body moves.

robert put it into words. if you cant, that would lead one to believe that you lack the full understanding

Mechanics CAN't be put into words, since it involves dynamic adjustment (it's not a static posture). I can get Dave to show you for free. If you are really interested, you'll see for yourself; if you're not, then you won't.

so some of the moves that are present in SN WC that are not in YM WC (turning YJKJM, turning punch, arrow punch, flapping wing palm, etc.) are inconsequential? they are all fantasy?

Everything in YKS WCK is, inplicitily or explicitly, in YMWCK. WCK is WCK. There are only the fundamentals of WCK, and everything else is derived from those. The curriculum to teach those fundamentals can vary, but that's inconsequential.

speaking of fantasy, could you please reconcile your other conflicting statements? you've said chi sau is fantasy. then you said that 12 san sik are for contact fighting and that its your primary fighting style.

I never said chi sao is fantasy. It is a very real exercise/drill. To believe it develops fighting skill is a fantasy. It doesn't -- only realistic practice develops realistic (fighting) skills.

Chi sao is a teaching/learning platform for learning the various contact fighting elements of WCK, and for learning to play that game (attached fighting) but it is done in an unrealistic way. It's is like riding a bicycle with the training wheels on -- you can learn some of the skills that you need but not under realistic conditions.

i trained with him twice when visiting because he is in my KF family. i do not claim to be his direct student. anyways this is irrelevant because the only reason i brought up that fact was that you made one of your usual know nothing assertions that i have never met him or seen him.

When, where did you train with him?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Besides the movements that are not in other WC lineages (and the movements that are in other lineages not in SN WC) HOW IT IS TAUGHT IS ALL ABOUT HOW IT IS APPLIED.

just look at yourself. we both learned the turning punch. you think its for application this way, i think its application is the other way.

I don't think it is used a certain way -- I use it a certain way. It's not an idea or what someone told me, it is how I learned to use it BY using it.

I know you are not using it as you say to use it, since it won't work that way.

your logic again is flawed. your reasoning is not the only reason why boxers dont move like that. anyways, i really dont think you understand how SN WC practioners turn to begin with so we are probably discussing different things anyways

You don't follow what I am saying: that WCK turning is too slow to use as evasion. Boxers use a different mechanics because they are using a mechanics that is fast enough to evade. Similarly, you are not going to be able to use simul blocks and punches -- they are low percentage, high risk movements. So if you combine them, you will end up moving to slow to evade while trying to do a low percentage, high risk movement. All you need to do is spend some time sparring with good people to see this.

as im sure you know, it is not always possible to translate from one language perfectly into another language. you can look up the english definition of a chinese word and the dictionary will do its best to map the chinese word into english words, but it is not always possible. at times there are words with no direct exact translation.

all i can tell you is that "loy lau hui sung" refers to yielding and interception. i speak chinese, i am very sure of this one

Anyone can look up the characters in a dictionary; the terms are very straightforward. I don't care if you speak chinese or not -- I've met many chinese speakers that have told me taht tan sao means palm up block!

i never heard this quote of his. please tell me why directly opposing a force (like pushing back when someone pushes on you) is a smart force while his is a dumb force? what makes your force smart?

There are a number of "give aways" that someone hasn't done any significant fighting/sparring, and one of them is citing "don't use force against force." Not only is that silly, but impossible. If you fight, you will and must use force aagainst force. The better fighter just uses his force "smartly", to greatest effect.

WC is all about finding the path of least resistance, so pushing back against the most difficult path seems pretty dumb to me

It just shows that you don't have much genuine experience in WCK or fighting. WCK is't "all about finding the path of least resistance". It is about controlling your opponent while striking him.

like i said. evasion is the point of that particular san sik (second from the left http://www.wingchunkuen.com/sumnung/articles/article_ritchie02_01.jpg) and not the whole system

That's not the "point" (yau dim) of that particular san sik.

Yoshiyahu

08-12-2009, 02:29 PM

Terrence Niehoff:

Mechanics CAN't be put into words, since it involves dynamic adjustment (it's not a static posture). I can get Dave to show you for free. If you are really interested, you'll see for yourself; if you're not, then you won't.

Terrence Niehoff can you show me what real fighting is with out me having to pay some $10 fee at the YMCA to meet some guy who I never met and never called me even after I gave you my phone number???

Pacman

08-12-2009, 05:11 PM

Everything in YKS WCK is, inplicitily or explicitly, in YMWCK. WCK is WCK. There are only the fundamentals of WCK, and everything else is derived from those. The curriculum to teach those fundamentals can vary, but that's inconsequential.

there are similarities that is for sure, but the different yiu dim or lack of yiu dim make a significant difference in application. take our example of the turning punch. what you learned and what i learned make it completely different.

on top of that are the movements that are not present in one lineage but in another and the fighting emphasis. for example i believe that SN WC places a greater emphasis on sweeps and throws than other lineages, as some other lineages do not have the white crane techniques

When, where did you train with him?

i know you are trying desperately to discredit me. this is a red herring because i never said i was his student or learned from him directly. i replied that i had met him when you incorrectly said i did not.

i met him around 86 i believe for his bday banquet in HK and one more time in mid 90s whe he was visiting in LA and I happened to be there too.

I don't think it is used a certain way -- I use it a certain way. It's not an idea or what someone told me, it is how I learned to use it BY using it.

you are real pedantic about the word "think" aren't you. i cant believe that in your 50+ years you have never understood it used in an assertive manner. after all, im sure someone has said to you, "I think you are a f*ckin @$$hole". am i right?

I know you are not using it as you say to use it, since it won't work that way.

so lets do some basic analysis here. you ride dale's nuts and listen to everything he says. he poo poos hawkins because he learned WC from him and as a result he thinks WC techniques and training is crap. You are essentially a second generation hawkins student through robert chu...but somehow in that process the crap turned into gold for you?

how do you reconcile your love for dale and your love for sifu robert?

You don't follow what I am saying: that WCK turning is too slow to use as evasion. Boxers use a different mechanics because they are using a mechanics that is fast enough to evade. Similarly, you are not going to be able to use simul blocks and punches -- they are low percentage, high risk movements. So if you combine them, you will end up moving to slow to evade while trying to do a low percentage, high risk movement. All you need to do is spend some time sparring with good people to see this.

you know what is a highe percentage strike? the aspergers strike. aspergers strikes again with the last sentence.

your reasoning, as usual as flawed. there are a million ways to avoid a punch. just because boxers do it a certain way does not mean it is the best or only way. boxers also block punches by putting their hands up over their face and body, but we know that in an environment w/o huge gloves this wont work.

you talk about low percentage again. all i can say is that you can't make it work. i and the people i trained with made it work.

i used to think you had somewhat an idea what you were talking about regarding fighting and WC, but after this discussion it went way downhill. i really dont think you fight at all despite all that you say. i wouldnt be surprised if there was no secret underground muay thai posing as wing chun fight club

Anyone can look up the characters in a dictionary; the terms are very straightforward.

as usual you don't read and comprehend well. I JUST SAID THAT DESPITE LOOKING UP A DEFINITION IN A CROSS LANGUAGE DICTIONARY, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT THERE IS NO DIRECT TRANSLATION AND NO EXACT CORRELATIVE WORD

There are a number of "give aways" that someone hasn't done any significant fighting/sparring, and one of them is citing "don't use force against force." Not only is that silly, but impossible. If you fight, you will and must use force aagainst force. The better fighter just uses his force "smartly", to greatest effect.

once again. read before writing. you also need to listen before speaking.

i explained it already but you didnt get it so i will say it again. im not saying that your body has no force, im saying that you do not directly oppose an oncoming force. that means when someone comes to tackle you, you dont smack into him like a sumo wrestler you might want to hit him from the side.

It just shows that you don't have much genuine experience in WCK or fighting. WCK is't "all about finding the path of least resistance". It is about controlling your opponent while striking him.

a big part of chi sau is about this. this is what soft styles (tai chi, xing yi, bagua) are all about. it doesnt mean you're arms are soft and flacid, it means that you dont always use force directly against force and that you yield and redirect.

That's not the "point" (yau dim) of that particular san sik.

well thats your view. we can leave it at that. if you trust your kulo, yuen kay san, yip man, muay thai combo to be real. after all it worked for dale...o wait it didnt. what to do!?

Yoshiyahu

08-12-2009, 05:29 PM

you really wasting yo time with terrence...

there are similarities that is for sure, but the different yiu dim or lack of yiu dim make a significant difference in application. take our example of the turning punch. what you learned and what i learned make it completely different.

on top of that are the movements that are not present in one lineage but in another and the fighting emphasis. for example i believe that SN WC places a greater emphasis on sweeps and throws than other lineages, as some other lineages do not have the white crane techniques

i know you are trying desperately to discredit me. this is a red herring because i never said i was his student or learned from him directly. i replied that i had met him when you incorrectly said i did not.

i met him around 86 i believe for his bday banquet in HK and one more time in mid 90s whe he was visiting in LA and I happened to be there too.

you are real pedantic about the word "think" aren't you. i cant believe that in your 50+ years you have never understood it used in an assertive manner. after all, im sure someone has said to you, "I think you are a f*ckin @$$hole". am i right?

so lets do some basic analysis here. you ride dale's nuts and listen to everything he says. he poo poos hawkins because he learned WC from him and as a result he thinks WC techniques and training is crap. You are essentially a second generation hawkins student through robert chu...but somehow in that process the crap turned into gold for you?

how do you reconcile your love for dale and your love for sifu robert?

you know what is a highe percentage strike? the aspergers strike. aspergers strikes again with the last sentence.

your reasoning, as usual as flawed. there are a million ways to avoid a punch. just because boxers do it a certain way does not mean it is the best or only way. boxers also block punches by putting their hands up over their face and body, but we know that in an environment w/o huge gloves this wont work.

you talk about low percentage again. all i can say is that you can't make it work. i and the people i trained with made it work.

i used to think you had somewhat an idea what you were talking about regarding fighting and WC, but after this discussion it went way downhill. i really dont think you fight at all despite all that you say. i wouldnt be surprised if there was no secret underground muay thai posing as wing chun fight club

as usual you don't read and comprehend well. I JUST SAID THAT DESPITE LOOKING UP A DEFINITION IN A CROSS LANGUAGE DICTIONARY, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT THERE IS NO DIRECT TRANSLATION AND NO EXACT CORRELATIVE WORD

once again. read before writing. you also need to listen before speaking.

i explained it already but you didnt get it so i will say it again. im not saying that your body has no force, im saying that you do not directly oppose an oncoming force. that means when someone comes to tackle you, you dont smack into him like a sumo wrestler you might want to hit him from the side.

a big part of chi sau is about this. this is what soft styles (tai chi, xing yi, bagua) are all about. it doesnt mean you're arms are soft and flacid, it means that you dont always use force directly against force and that you yield and redirect.

well thats your view. we can leave it at that. if you trust your kulo, yuen kay san, yip man, muay thai combo to be real. after all it worked for dale...o wait it didnt. what to do!?

t_niehoff

08-12-2009, 08:13 PM

Terrence Niehoff:

Terrence Niehoff can you show me what real fighting is with out me having to pay some $10 fee at the YMCA to meet some guy who I never met and never called me even after I gave you my phone number???

I told you that we train at a Y, and that you needed to either be a YMCA member or pay a $10 visitors fee to use the facilities. You didn't want to pay. So why would I call you? To talk about what? How you believe you are entitled to something?

I told you before that don't want anything to do with you or your group -- I told you that and you know why. I know all about your group and the people in it. You, I understand, are part of some weird religious group. Your WCK group is headed by a fake YKS practitioner, Eddie Ma, and his senior student was a crack dealer and wife-beater who got run out of St. Louis by law enforcement. Various members of your group were/are addicted to crack. None of them have any skill.

Yet, I was going to do you a favor and let you come train/spar but you responded like the ass that you are. And, of course, I shouldn't be surprised knowing your background.

If you want to see real fighting, then go train at VAghi's or Ron Smith's or Finney's or Steve Berger's or any of the places where genuine, good fighters train. Nothing is stopping you. That's where we all train when we aren't at the Y. The only thing is that you have to pay to train. So, that provides you with the best excuse for not doing it.

t_niehoff

08-12-2009, 08:45 PM

there are similarities that is for sure, but the different yiu dim or lack of yiu dim make a significant difference in application. take our example of the turning punch. what you learned and what i learned make it completely different.

Wrong.

on top of that are the movements that are not present in one lineage but in another and the fighting emphasis. for example i believe that SN WC places a greater emphasis on sweeps and throws than other lineages, as some other lineages do not have the white crane techniques

You are talking curriculum, not subject matter. The curriculum doesn't teach you application; your opponent's do.

i know you are trying desperately to discredit me. this is a red herring because i never said i was his student or learned from him directly. i replied that i had met him when you incorrectly said i did not.

i met him around 86 i believe for his bday banquet in HK and one more time in mid 90s whe he was visiting in LA and I happened to be there too.

OK, so you met him but never trained with him.

you are real pedantic about the word "think" aren't you. i cant believe that in your 50+ years you have never understood it used in an assertive manner. after all, im sure someone has said to you, "I think you are a f*ckin @$$hole". am i right?

I only can go by what you write.

so lets do some basic analysis here. you ride dale's nuts and listen to everything he says. he poo poos hawkins because he learned WC from him and as a result he thinks WC techniques and training is crap. You are essentially a second generation hawkins student through robert chu...but somehow in that process the crap turned into gold for you?

how do you reconcile your love for dale and your love for sifu robert?

Your questions only demonstrate you are clueless.

I give Dale his due -- he is a fighter, is highly skilled, has a lot of experience fighting with good fighters, and has trained extensively with good, proven fighters. Who else on this forum can say that? Certainly not you.

So his views are worth considering -- he knows how to effectively train to fight, he knows fighting. That people who poo-poo his views only demonstrate their ignorance and lack of genuine experience. Mostly, you have theoretical nonfighters like Victor who has learned "catch" via video and rolled a bit with his students arguing grappling with a genuine BJJ BB! It's insane.

I agree with Dale on many things. My agreement is based on my own experience and from seeing what good, proven fighters (like Dale) and fight trainers do.

I think most WCK people are silly; they don't train like fighters and so can have little to no real skill. And understanding comes from skill, from fighting skill. It's not like any of Dale's detractors are going out and sparring with their WCK with good fighters.

Robert teaches WCK. All any WCK teacher can do is teach you the curriculum of WCK. To learn to fight with WCK and develop skill fighting with WCK comes ONLY from fighting, not from your teacher. It doesn't matter what generation or teacher you have -- what matters is the WORK you do. Are you going out and putting in hundreds of hours of sparring with good, proven, competent fighters? If not, you can't develop any significant skill or understanding of WCK.

you know what is a highe percentage strike? the aspergers strike. aspergers strikes again with the last sentence.

your reasoning, as usual as flawed. there are a million ways to avoid a punch. just because boxers do it a certain way does not mean it is the best or only way. boxers also block punches by putting their hands up over their face and body, but we know that in an environment w/o huge gloves this wont work.

you talk about low percentage again. all i can say is that you can't make it work. i and the people i trained with made it work.

Everyone is a master and everyone can make their silly-ass theories work. The only rub is that we never see any evidence that supports their silly-ass theory really working.

This is the standard TMAist response -- we can really do it. The only problem is there is no evidnece that is the case (other than assertions).

i used to think you had somewhat an idea what you were talking about regarding fighting and WC, but after this discussion it went way downhill. i really dont think you fight at all despite all that you say. i wouldnt be surprised if there was no secret underground muay thai posing as wing chun fight club

I could care less what you think.

as usual you don't read and comprehend well. I JUST SAID THAT DESPITE LOOKING UP A DEFINITION IN A CROSS LANGUAGE DICTIONARY, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT THERE IS NO DIRECT TRANSLATION AND NO EXACT CORRELATIVE WORD

There may in some cases not be an exact correlative word but the meaning of a word can be adequately expressed in another language (for example by using many words).

once again. read before writing. you also need to listen before speaking.

i explained it already but you didnt get it so i will say it again. im not saying that your body has no force, im saying that you do not directly oppose an oncoming force. that means when someone comes to tackle you, you dont smack into him like a sumo wrestler you might want to hit him from the side.

And again, you're flat-out wrong. In fighitng you can't consistently not use force against force -- you're always using force and very often in direct opposition to your opponent. You are looking at things from some fantasy, imaginary, theoretical view.

a big part of chi sau is about this. this is what soft styles (tai chi, xing yi, bagua) are all about. it doesnt mean you're arms are soft and flacid, it means that you dont always use force directly against force and that you yield and redirect.

Soft/hard is more nonsense. That you believe you can "yiled and redirect" only tells me you don't fight but that it is all theory.

Mr Punch

08-12-2009, 08:58 PM

Quick question: this thread is 9 pages long... will I learn anything from reading it?

Cheers!
:D

Ultimatewingchun

08-12-2009, 09:01 PM

Not a thing! :D

t_niehoff

08-12-2009, 09:30 PM

Not a thing! :D

Yes, unfortunately some people never learn . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdF1nIAfpk

Phil Redmond

08-13-2009, 05:22 AM

. . . . I give Dale his due -- he is a fighter, is highly skilled, has a lot of experience fighting with good fighters, and has trained extensively with good, proven fighters. Who else on this forum can say that? Certainly not you.. . . . .

I give Dale his props but I can and I know of others here as well. (Every member here doesn't post. They simply read and laugh).

t_niehoff

08-13-2009, 06:21 AM

I give Dale his props but I can and I know of others here as well. (Every member here doesn't post. They simply read and laugh).

Yes, I too know of some people on this forum, some who post and some who don't, that have put in the work of training with good, proven fighters too. I don't however know of anyone in WCK with his proven fighting and training experience, and neither do you.

And, I think the voice of that experience is worth listening to -- far more than the people without or with little good experience, no matter how easily they laugh.

sanjuro_ronin

08-13-2009, 06:26 AM

Quick question: this thread is 9 pages long... will I learn anything from reading it?

Cheers!
:D

Alow me:
IF you KNOW how to FIGHT, feints work, if you DON'T, they won't work for you.

t_niehoff

08-13-2009, 06:36 AM

Very good.

Mr Punch

08-13-2009, 08:34 AM

Alow me:
IF you KNOW how to FIGHT, feints work, if you DON'T, they won't work for you.Thanks mate. :D

I knew that. :)

But thanks anyway for the summary. ;)

JPinAZ

08-13-2009, 08:56 AM

I told you that we train at a Y, and that you needed to either be a YMCA member or pay a $10 visitors fee to use the facilities. You didn't want to pay. So why would I call you? To talk about what? How you believe you are entitled to something?

I told you before that don't want anything to do with you or your group -- I told you that and you know why. I know all about your group and the people in it. You, I understand, are part of some weird religious group. Your WCK group is headed by a fake YKS practitioner, Eddie Ma, and his senior student was a crack dealer and wife-beater who got run out of St. Louis by law enforcement. Various members of your group were/are addicted to crack. None of them have any skill.

Yet, I was going to do you a favor and let you come train/spar but you responded like the ass that you are. And, of course, I shouldn't be surprised knowing your background.

If you want to see real fighting, then go train at VAghi's or Ron Smith's or Finney's or Steve Berger's or any of the places where genuine, good fighters train. Nothing is stopping you. That's where we all train when we aren't at the Y. The only thing is that you have to pay to train. So, that provides you with the best excuse for not doing it.

Sorry to keep this going, but I'm so tired of this guy's krap..

This isn't how it went down at all, at least not on the forums. On the forums you made up excuse after excuse, told him he needed to train MT for 2 years first :rolleyes:, denied him the chance to come spar with you, set up condition after condition, said he would have to spar one of your students, blah blah blah.

All of this crap was because he took you up on your long-going standing offer for anyone here to 'come see how you do it'. It's not about being entitled to anything, you ran your fat mouth and he took you up on it. As soon as you had a local taker, you backed off/b!tched out and looked like a fool to everyone here. Even your boy Dale said you didn't look good. (don't feel like going back and finding his exact words)

Now you have some other convenient excuses, long after the fact. You say you won't spar with him because of some other people he trianed with - you didn't say this at the time he took you up on your offer. Who cares if some of the people he trained with had problems? That doesn't mean he's like them right?
If so, are you saying every person you have ever sparred with, or defended in court, were upstanding citizens? haha, what a laugh!! You deffend and associate with known and guilty rapists, drug addicts, murders, etc on a day to day basis and even go on to say how nice of people they are in an interview. But now you're afraid to have a friendly sparring session with someone after you ran your mouth here because they trained with some unscrupulous people. What a joke!

Bottom line is, you never intended to stand by your offer. Most likely because you would finally have to back up the crap you talk here. Here's your chance to prove your worth! He's game to still meet, so why not take him up on his offer and just finish all this childish bickering? We're all supposed to be fighters right? well then fight or STFU..
Are you going to accept his attempt to meet you or not? I'll send you guys the $10!

Pacman

08-13-2009, 09:44 AM

OK, so you met him but never trained with him.

no, second time i met him i trained with my sifu and he watched over and gave some pointers.

Phil Redmond

08-13-2009, 02:04 PM

Yes, I too know of some people on this forum, some who post and some who don't, that have put in the work of training with good, proven fighters too. I don't however know of anyone in WCK with his proven fighting and training experience, and neither do you.
Very wrong I am one and so is Keith Mazza. Just because you aren't aware any anyone doesn't make it impossible.

And, I think the voice of that experience is worth listening to -- far more than the people without or with little good experience, no matter how easily they laugh.
Of course it good to listen to someone with experience in any field.

Yoshiyahu

08-13-2009, 04:05 PM

Great Post..JPinAZ. When My hours change in September I was actually planning on finding out what YMCA they trained at an going there. An meet them. Just to see Niehoff give me another Excuse. But Niehoff has said over and over again "he doesn't want to see Me." I even offered to just train if he didnt want to fight it would have been cool. But he continously Biatch out. So its cool. I wasn't really going to test him or make him out to be a liar. If he was all talk and a horrible fighter I would have kept that sheesh to myself. Out respect for a local WChunner who trains diligently. There are martial artist here in STL who have been training longer than I been alive. Irregardless how weak their karate or kung fu is I give them the utmost respect for they are legends in their own right.

Sorry to keep this going, but I'm so tired of this guy's krap..

This isn't how it went down at all, at least not on the forums. On the forums you made up excuse after excuse, told him he needed to train MT for 2 years first :rolleyes:, denied him the chance to come spar with you, set up condition after condition, said he would have to spar one of your students, blah blah blah.

All of this crap was because he took you up on your long-going standing offer for anyone here to 'come see how you do it'. It's not about being entitled to anything, you ran your fat mouth and he took you up on it. As soon as you had a local taker, you backed off/b!tched out and looked like a fool to everyone here. Even your boy Dale said you didn't look good. (don't feel like going back and finding his exact words)

Now you have some other convenient excuses, long after the fact. You say you won't spar with him because of some other people he trianed with - you didn't say this at the time he took you up on your offer. Who cares if some of the people he trained with had problems? That doesn't mean he's like them right?
If so, are you saying every person you have ever sparred with, or defended in court, were upstanding citizens? haha, what a laugh!! You deffend and associate with known and guilty rapists, drug addicts, murders, etc on a day to day basis and even go on to say how nice of people they are in an interview. But now you're afraid to have a friendly sparring session with someone after you ran your mouth here because they trained with some unscrupulous people. What a joke!

Bottom line is, you never intended to stand by your offer. Most likely because you would finally have to back up the crap you talk here. Here's your chance to prove your worth! He's game to still meet, so why not take him up on his offer and just finish all this childish bickering? We're all supposed to be fighters right? well then fight or STFU..
Are you going to accept his attempt to meet you or not? I'll send you guys the $10!

Pacman

08-13-2009, 05:17 PM

Alow me:
IF you KNOW how to FIGHT, feints work, if you DON'T, they won't work for you.

well terrence said that feints generally wont work.

so if a = b and b = c then a = ?...

Yoshiyahu

08-13-2009, 05:33 PM

well terrence said that feints generally wont work.

so if a = b and b = c then a = ?...

To keep it honest i think Terrence Said Feints are not apart of the WC system and traditionally they will be useless against a unskilled fighter who jams up your space an who is overly aggressivie. But I don't think he really believes they don't work if you know how to get distance to slip the feints. But you have to be on the outside to adminster feints. I personally love using feints in sparring against outside fighters. Its great bait to get them to commit. Then when they attempt to gain entry and give me a bridge i begin trapping and hitting and controlling their elbow.

Edmund

08-13-2009, 07:02 PM

Yoshiyahu

08-13-2009, 07:14 PM

What city are you in Edmund?

I'm sick of Terence's crap as well but...
Yoshiyahu is a nutcase as much as Terence is. At the time he first proposed taking lessons from Terence, he was talking on the forum about tearing off opponents balls, biting them and trying to biu jee them through the chest. He wrote in the style of an early teen rather than an early 30's man and pretended to be a WC newbie. People were actually questioning his age.

It was probably for the best that Terence blew him off. I don't think two nutjobs meeting up will end well.

JP, put your money away.

Terence talked crap well before he did any MMA crosstraining or sparring at all. He was just as disagreeable on different topics from what I recall. Supposedly he had his ass handed to him at an MMA school but rather than being actually humbled, he was just reborn as a different breed of a55hole. This is something that martial arts can't solve.

Edmund

08-13-2009, 07:21 PM

What city are you in Edmund?

Sydney, Australia.

We have an airport tax. I'm not sure you could afford it.

Yoshiyahu

08-13-2009, 07:32 PM

Sydney, Australia.

We have an airport tax. I'm not sure you could afford it.

Darn it Australia mate...Tooo Darn it Far...wow bloke you stay far man...ohwell I will settle for your ramblings.

Edmund quick question do you believe Feints are apart of the original Wing Chun curriculm?

Edmund

08-13-2009, 08:00 PM

Darn it Australia mate...Tooo Darn it Far...wow bloke you stay far man...ohwell I will settle for your ramblings.

Edmund quick question do you believe Feints are apart of the original Wing Chun curriculm?

I mentioned I was in Australia last time you asked. You were probably preoccupied with trying to manipulate a meeting with Terence.

I don't know what the original WC curriculum was.
If I stuck to the original WC, I'd probably be flapping my wings while slithering on the ground.

Mr Punch

08-13-2009, 11:35 PM

I don't know what the original WC curriculum was.
If I stuck to the original WC, I'd probably be flapping my wings while slithering on the ground.Mind if I borrow that!? :D

t_niehoff

08-14-2009, 06:37 AM

Great Post..JPinAZ. When My hours change in September I was actually planning on finding out what YMCA they trained at an going there. An meet them. Just to see Niehoff give me another Excuse. But Niehoff has said over and over again "he doesn't want to see Me." I even offered to just train if he didnt want to fight it would have been cool. But he continously Biatch out. So its cool. I wasn't really going to test him or make him out to be a liar. If he was all talk and a horrible fighter I would have kept that sheesh to myself. Out respect for a local WChunner who trains diligently. There are martial artist here in STL who have been training longer than I been alive. Irregardless how weak their karate or kung fu is I give them the utmost respect for they are legends in their own right.

How clear can I make this for you -- you wrote me out of the blue asking to be able to come train with us. You weren't challenging me, but asking to come train with us. In other words, you wanted something from me. You wanted a favor. It's like asking to borrow money or borrow somone's car -- there is a way that normal, somewhat intelligent people go about it. They ask nicely, they might even kiss a bit of ass, etc. And that's because they want something THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO. You didn't take that approach, but tried to force me and coerce me and etc. to get your way. When people do that, they don't get favors from me. You can't demand to use my car and expect to get what you want.

But when one of my training partners said he wanted me to invite you, I did. So I did you a favor, a big favor, and invited you. The only condition was that you had to pay a f#cking, measley $10 visitor fee to the Y. That's all. So how do you respond to the favor, by rejecting it and saying that you shouldn't have to pay anything. Well, that burned your bridges with me.

And while all this is going on, I do a bit of research about you and find out who your sifu and group was. And as I told you, I've personally met Eddie Ma and he was a fake (the san sik he taught should tell you that he didn't know YKS WCK since they are not the true san sik). I know all about McField (even his trying to the sam gwok ma fotwork on the outside at a karate tournament and getting kicked in the head), about Burnside, Buschard (like how he used to try to pay for WCK lessons with stolen goods), Mohammed, John, etc. I remember when you guys used to "storm" local tai ji and other nonfighitng schools to"challenge" them (poor Tom Knecht). I knew about the legal problems McField got into, the drug use in your group, etc. I found out about the religious cult you're involved with. Even your posts on this forum convinced me that you were a few beers short of a six pack.

So, is it surprising that I want nothing to do with you? Why would I? Why would any reasonable person want anything to do with you?

t_niehoff

08-14-2009, 07:00 AM

Sorry to keep this going, but I'm so tired of this guy's krap..

This isn't how it went down at all, at least not on the forums. On the forums you made up excuse after excuse, told him he needed to train MT for 2 years first :rolleyes:, denied him the chance to come spar with you, set up condition after condition, said he would have to spar one of your students, blah blah blah.

You are talking about things of which you have no real knowledge. I have had many off-forum discussions with Clarence, none of which you know anything about. Did you know he contacted me before he even joined this forum? I tell anyone who contacts me out of the blue about wanting to learn WCK to go train MT or boxing or some functional art. I don't run a school. My WCK group is a private group. No one is entitled to join it.

All of this crap was because he took you up on your long-going standing offer for anyone here to 'come see how you do it'. It's not about being entitled to anything, you ran your fat mouth and he took you up on it. As soon as you had a local taker, you backed off/b!tched out and looked like a fool to everyone here. Even your boy Dale said you didn't look good. (don't feel like going back and finding his exact words)

Clarence didn't contact me to see what we do, but to come train with us. To join our group. You told me back in June that you'd be visiting me in July, and I told you that you were welcome to visit. I'm not telling you that you can join our training group. Do you see the diffrerence?

Now you have some other convenient excuses, long after the fact. You say you won't spar with him because of some other people he trianed with - you didn't say this at the time he took you up on your offer. Who cares if some of the people he trained with had problems? That doesn't mean he's like them right?

Try to get this through your head -- he was asking to join our group, to come train with us. Not to just meet up and spar. The offer I was extending was that he could come to the Y to train (which includes sparring since that is the core of how we train).

I AM particular about who I associate with. Yes, who he assoicates with does tell me about him. Like attracts like IMO.

My belief was that if he showed up, he wouldn't stay since he probably couldn't even get through the warm up we do.

If so, are you saying every person you have ever sparred with, or defended in court, were upstanding citizens? haha, what a laugh!! You deffend and associate with known and guilty rapists, drug addicts, murders, etc on a day to day basis and even go on to say how nice of people they are in an interview. But now you're afraid to have a friendly sparring session with someone after you ran your mouth here because they trained with some unscrupulous people. What a joke!

Are you a complete idiot?

I am a criminal defesne attorney -- my job is defending people charged with crimes. But that doesn't mean I associate with them, that I spend my free time with them, that they come to my home (which is another place we train), etc. In my job, everyday I see what can happen just from associations, just from being around people who are "bad news". A great many people get into a lot of trouble just from being around the wrong people. I am very careful with whom I associate.

Bottom line is, you never intended to stand by your offer. Most likely because you would finally have to back up the crap you talk here. Here's your chance to prove your worth! He's game to still meet, so why not take him up on his offer and just finish all this childish bickering? We're all supposed to be fighters right? well then fight or STFU..
Are you going to accept his attempt to meet you or not? I'll send you guys the $10!

Oh, another internet challenge.

Pacman

08-14-2009, 07:22 AM

How clear can I make this for you -- you wrote me out of the blue asking to be able to come train with us.

LIES!!!

you had an open invitation for people to come see what you do...your MT WC magic

(the san sik he taught should tell you that he didn't know YKS WCK since they are not the true san sik)

thats what i would say about you!

while we are talking...what is this cult business?

Mr Punch

08-14-2009, 07:42 AM

Pacman, read it again. It isn't 'Lies', but T said that C was in touch with him before he even joined this board.

As far as I can see, these two posts from T go a helluva a long way to explaining the kind of person he is and why he doesn't go for all this ****ing contest stuff or post about everylittle****thing that happens to him in offline. Fair play to you T, you should've explained all that **** that this Clarence geezer was up to before: it would have made you look a lot better from the start, but then again, fair play to you, I know you don't really care about how you look on here. :D

Da mn, looks like I'm just posting to stick my nose in again... maybe time for a rest from the board!

Pacman

08-14-2009, 07:47 AM

ill have to hear clarence's side of the story first. until then its just his word.

all i know is what is on the forum and like you said, why wasnt this explained before

Pacman, read it again. It isn't 'Lies', but T said that C was in touch with him before he even joined this board.

As far as I can see, these two posts from T go a helluva a long way to explaining the kind of person he is and why he doesn't go for all this ****ing contest stuff or post about everylittle****thing that happens to him in offline. Fair play to you T, you should've explained all that **** that this Clarence geezer was up to before: it would have made you look a lot better from the start, but then again, fair play to you, I know you don't really care about how you look on here. :D

Da mn, looks like I'm just posting to stick my nose in again... maybe time for a rest from the board!

t_niehoff

08-14-2009, 09:14 AM

Mr. Punch, I don't care how I "look" to people on this board or whether people like pacman believe me or not. I'm not trying to win admirers or prove anything to anyone. I don't think in those terms. To me, that's little kid stuff and for people with fragile egos (and anyone who knows me knows my ego isn't fragile!). I come to this board to share my views (which are in opposition to many of the "standard views") and discuss them. And the only reason I do that is because I wish someone had told me some of these things 20 years ago -- it would have saved me a lot of wasted time, energy, money, etc. Not that I'm saying that I would have believed them either, but they would have at least gotten me thinking -- a very rare quality among this lot. It may have gotten me to step outside my preconceptions and actually go visit some good fighters much, much earlier. My hope is that my experience may help a very few among you -- I say very few since I think many of the people in TMAs and WCK are lost in fantasyland and want to stay there.

JPinAZ

08-14-2009, 11:40 AM

T, you dum sh!t, if you knew how to read, you'd see I qualified my eniter post by starting off with: "This isn't how it went down at all, at least not on the forums. On the forums you made up excuse after excuse"
Anything you say that happened before, during, or after outside of what was said on this forum is heresay without proof. We can only go with what was said here. And the way it went down, it sounded like Clarence had never heard of you until he came here and was looking to come spar with you.

People can make up whatever stories they want. You can make any lame excuses you want. But on this forum it was pretty clear he wasn't trying to 'join your group', he was looking to come meet with you and spar - per you long-standing offer to anyone here.
Stop making excuses and pointing at this person and that person. It makes you look real pathetic. Either spar with him or not. That's the end of it.

And, I'll be there when my work sends me there. I'll call you and I'll come to see what you're about. But I'm getting the feeling something will come up and you won't be able to meet. :rolleyes: But we'll see!

Yoshiyahu

08-14-2009, 11:40 AM

I have a few disagreements about what your statements very contradicting. First off all I wanted to train with your group true enough. I wanted to see how you guys train. As for being a lifetime member that would depend on how real the training was an if I could benefit.

Contradiction: one case your worried about me joining your group. But you never thought for a second i would be able to endure the training and thus i wouldnt be a long term memeber?

Like pacman said your making lies to make yourself look good. Before my Sihing told me about this forum I had no way of contacting you. I don't know your number buddy. I don't know who you are. Before this forum i knew nothing about you, AS for doing research on my group. You knew about McField, Mike Burnside and Mau Chang way before I ever came to this site. Check my join date on this site and check the date of this thread. Do a comparison.

http://kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=774995&highlight=mau+chang#post774995

As for you saying I coherced you someway. What do I got on you really? Please show me some credible evidence to prove I blackmailed you. An before this site I didn't contact you. So please stop lying.

As for entitlement. Well buddy you are absolutely right you have every right to refuse my request. Thats admirable. But with that being said don't trash talk my Lineage either. If you think my WC is fantasy then keep it to yourself until you touch hands with me. AS for wanting to train with you that part is true.

As for wanting to spar you. Yea thats true too especially after you started talking that crap about my WC not being functional and I need to go learn Muay Thai for two years. You said Muay Thai fighters are real fighters I need to learn from. So at that point I was like Lets just spar buddy. You refused me so I called you a coward. I guess thats the cohersion. Again when the quasi pressure point master heckled you enough you ablidged him. But Me I get no answer. An now your are on here talking about your afraid to interact me because I am so so bad. I am such a crazy that its best you stay far far away from me. Fear and Caution you have.

As for supernatural religious cult BS. Please share with us what that is. As for asking nicely I can understand that. But kissing your arse you must be out of your mind buddy...your arrogance is amazing.

But as for asking nicely. I can agree with that. Please illustrate my post that were rude and arrogant? Please post my post with dates that were not kind but pushy?

Wheres your collabarating evidence at?

AS for the measly $10....what YMCA are you guys at? what time? I will be there...

How clear can I make this for you -- you wrote me out of the blue asking to be able to come train with us. You weren't challenging me, but asking to come train with us. In other words, you wanted something from me. You wanted a favor. It's like asking to borrow money or borrow somone's car -- there is a way that normal, somewhat intelligent people go about it. They ask nicely, they might even kiss a bit of ass, etc. And that's because they want something THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO. You didn't take that approach, but tried to force me and coerce me and etc. to get your way. When people do that, they don't get favors from me. You can't demand to use my car and expect to get what you want.

But when one of my training partners said he wanted me to invite you, I did. So I did you a favor, a big favor, and invited you. The only condition was that you had to pay a f#cking, measley $10 visitor fee to the Y. That's all. So how do you respond to the favor, by rejecting it and saying that you shouldn't have to pay anything. Well, that burned your bridges with me.

And while all this is going on, I do a bit of research about you and find out who your sifu and group was. And as I told you, I've personally met Eddie Ma and he was a fake (the san sik he taught should tell you that he didn't know YKS WCK since they are not the true san sik). I know all about McField (even his trying to the sam gwok ma fotwork on the outside at a karate tournament and getting kicked in the head), about Burnside, Buschard (like how he used to try to pay for WCK lessons with stolen goods), Mohammed, John, etc. I remember when you guys used to "storm" local tai ji and other nonfighitng schools to"challenge" them (poor Tom Knecht). I knew about the legal problems McField got into, the drug use in your group, etc. I found out about the religious cult you're involved with. Even your posts on this forum convinced me that you were a few beers short of a six pack.

So, is it surprising that I want nothing to do with you? Why would I? Why would any reasonable person want anything to do with you?

JPinaz said:
And, I'll be there when my work sends me there. I'll call you and I'll come to see what you're about. But I'm getting the feeling something will come up and you won't be able to meet. But we'll see!

Not gonna happen buddy your coherceing him too much...He aint gonna do you no favors. Betta Kiss his behind a little if you want Terrence to give you the time of day...

Anyway I wanted to see T's Group at first I thought from all his talk that his group where real fighters who trained hard. But after all the talk and trash. I started to really doubt him. Anyway When ever I get directions to YMCA I will be there with my $10. Just waiting for his comrade in arms to call me. Terrence should i give you my number again? Terrence was talking about how his groups trains hard every day and fights every day. So I wanted to see for myself maybe there was something I could learn. I never blabbed my mouth about being a functional fighter or a better fighter than anyone. I am practioner who is here to learn how to use his art my effectively. But MR. T Niehoff has a long fox hole of reasons of why his open invitiation is not open to me. But everyone else outside of St.Louis is more than welcome. But JPinaz will soon prove this to be false too..

JPinaz said:
Anything you say that happened before, during, or after outside of what was said on this forum is heresay without proof. We can only go with what was said here. And the way it went down, it sounded like Clarence had never heard of you until he came here and was looking to come spar with you.

So true wow hit the nail on the head why don't you. Alls Terrence do is make excuses. Even Now his lies are clear indictment to clear his tarnished name. I respect how is conspirators stay away from his trash talk on this issue an stand back so he can defend himself. But the more he talks the worst he sounds.

Pacman

08-14-2009, 01:43 PM

good job using posts and join dates to rebut terrence's lies. looks like gets schooled in the courtroom too!

Yoshiyahu

08-14-2009, 02:19 PM

good job using posts and join dates to rebut terrence's lies. looks like gets schooled in the courtroom too!

Nah Terrence is gonna ignore that...he gonna go to something totally different.

t_niehoff

08-14-2009, 04:01 PM

I have a few disagreements about what your statements very contradicting. First off all I wanted to train with your group true enough. I wanted to see how you guys train. As for being a lifetime member that would depend on how real the training was an if I could benefit.

I never said anything about "a lifetime member."

Contradiction: one case your worried about me joining your group. But you never thought for a second i would be able to endure the training and thus i wouldnt be a long term memeber?

I thought and still think that you like most TMA people don't really want to train.

Like pacman said your making lies to make yourself look good. Before my Sihing told me about this forum I had no way of contacting you. I don't know your number buddy. I don't know who you are. Before this forum i knew nothing about you, AS for doing research on my group. You knew about McField, Mike Burnside and Mau Chang way before I ever came to this site. Check my join date on this site and check the date of this thread. Do a comparison.

I got emails not PMs from you before you started hitting this forum.

Yes, I knew about Ma, McField, etc. before you started posting (I knew MA was a fake in the 80s). But, as you may recall, you wouldn't tell anyone who your sifu was on this forum (something about him wanting to remain anonymous). Remember the PM I sent you asking you if Burnside wasn't your sifu? And how surprised you were that I knew? How you responded by saying it was Woody, not Mike that taught you? Getting fresher?

As for you saying I coherced you someway. What do I got on you really? Please show me some credible evidence to prove I blackmailed you. An before this site I didn't contact you. So please stop lying.

I never said you "blackmailed" me -- you couldn't, as there is nothing to blackmail me about. What you tried to do, and what you're still trying to do, is get your way by trying to force or coerce me into meeting with you, like with online challenges, etc. That crap doesn't work with me. The more you do it, the more it tells me you are a f#cking idiot. Throwing tantrums won't get you what you want.

As for entitlement. Well buddy you are absolutely right you have every right to refuse my request. Thats admirable. But with that being said don't trash talk my Lineage either. If you think my WC is fantasy then keep it to yourself until you touch hands with me. AS for wanting to train with you that part is true.

I know that part is true. Everything I say is true. I'm not trash talking your lineage -- I'm telling the truth. Ma didn't know YKS WCK. His WCK was crap. You just need to look at your san sik to know he made most of them up.

As for wanting to spar you. Yea thats true too especially after you started talking that crap about my WC not being functional and I need to go learn Muay Thai for two years. You said Muay Thai fighters are real fighters I need to learn from. So at that point I was like Lets just spar buddy. You refused me so I called you a coward. I guess thats the cohersion. Again when the quasi pressure point master heckled you enough you ablidged him. But Me I get no answer. An now your are on here talking about your afraid to interact me because I am so so bad. I am such a crazy that its best you stay far far away from me. Fear and Caution you have.

Again, you just show what an idiot you are. I told you the truth but you still don't want to hear it. MT people train like fighters. I told you that if you want to make your WCK functional to go train with real, genuine fighters. This is the best advice anyone could give you. So what is your response? To not take the advice and instead act like an idiot. Now you don't want to train with me but want to fight me.

Consider that behavior, then consider your fantasy posts that Edmund brought up:

"At the time he first proposed taking lessons from Terence, he was talking on the forum about tearing off opponents balls, biting them and trying to biu jee them through the chest. He wrote in the style of an early teen rather than an early 30's man and pretended to be a WC newbie. People were actually questioning his age."

Now, considering this, considering what I know of you and your group, and your behavior now, is it any wonder that I don't want anything to do with you?

As for supernatural religious cult BS. Please share with us what that is. As for asking nicely I can understand that. But kissing your arse you must be out of your mind buddy...your arrogance is amazing.

But as for asking nicely. I can agree with that. Please illustrate my post that were rude and arrogant? Please post my post with dates that were not kind but pushy?

Wheres your collabarating evidence at?

I'm not going to go through the posts -- anyone who wants to can do so. But in your own post above you say:

"As for wanting to spar you. Yea thats true too especially after you started talking that crap about my WC not being functional and I need to go learn Muay Thai for two years. You said Muay Thai fighters are real fighters I need to learn from. So at that point I was like Lets just spar buddy. You refused me so I called you a coward. I guess thats the cohersion."

Yup, at the time you were asking about training with us, you began these tactics to try to get your way. You contradict yourself in your own post.

AS for the measly $10....what YMCA are you guys at? what time? I will be there...

Oh, NOW you want to show up and pay! LOL! Sorry, dude, that boat sailed.

Anyway I wanted to see T's Group at first I thought from all his talk that his group where real fighters who trained hard. But after all the talk and trash. I started to really doubt him. Anyway When ever I get directions to YMCA I will be there with my $10. Just waiting for his comrade in arms to call me. Terrence should i give you my number again? Terrence was talking about how his groups trains hard every day and fights every day. So I wanted to see for myself maybe there was something I could learn. I never blabbed my mouth about being a functional fighter or a better fighter than anyone. I am practioner who is here to learn how to use his art my effectively. But MR. T Niehoff has a long fox hole of reasons of why his open invitiation is not open to me. But everyone else outside of St.Louis is more than welcome. But JPinaz will soon prove this to be false too..

And you're such an idiot that you wonder why I won't have anything to do with you.

Yoshiyahu

08-14-2009, 04:16 PM

I didnt know you before I got on this forum...I didnt have your email before this forum...I dont have your email now. So Please stop lying. As for my Sifu its not Mike Burnside. We already established that. My Sifu does like to remain anymnous because he simply teaches the public Tai Chi for health. But as for my group being some cult. Please share how Burnside or Stan are cult religiousnous?

As for McField and Ma. I never met them. So i can not judge.

As for me I am very honest. When will you be...You make up lies. Why are you fabricating things. The only thing that matters is I will never meet your group an see you train. As you said that boat has sailed.

So you have your third excuse. Nothing more needs to be said. So stop talking about functional fighters. Because your not willing to see me.

I got emails not PMs from you before you started hitting this forum.

You lying here buddy...I didn't know before this forum? Where the hell would get your email from prior to this. Plus how would I know about your group prior to forum?

I told you that if you want to make your WCK functional to go train with real, genuine fighters. This is the best advice anyone could give you.

So how about I train with you guys?

As for eye gouging and stuff. Thats not sparring someone. Thats a real fight life and death...Someone is trying to hurt you in the street. Thats a different story. I would still claw and bite if I couldnt do anything else in a street fight.

"As for wanting to spar you. Yea thats true too especially after you started talking that crap about my WC not being functional and I need to go learn Muay Thai for two years. You said Muay Thai fighters are real fighters I need to learn from. So at that point I was like Lets just spar buddy. You refused me so I called you a coward. I guess thats the cohersion."

So you see this as cohersion? What I am doing right now is cohersion then too???
It don't matter buddy. I will enjoy talking BS to you because I know you will never ablidge me. If you do then I will respect you as a man. Until you get no respect.

But Terrence lets get back on the topic of feints!

I never said anything about "a lifetime member."

I thought and still think that you like most TMA people don't really want to train.

I got emails not PMs from you before you started hitting this forum.

Yes, I knew about Ma, McField, etc. before you started posting (I knew MA was a fake in the 80s). But, as you may recall, you wouldn't tell anyone who your sifu was on this forum (something about him wanting to remain anonymous). Remember the PM I sent you asking you if Burnside wasn't your sifu? And how surprised you were that I knew? How you responded by saying it was Woody, not Mike that taught you? Getting fresher?

I never said you "blackmailed" me -- you couldn't, as there is nothing to blackmail me about. What you tried to do, and what you're still trying to do, is get your way by trying to force or coerce me into meeting with you, like with online challenges, etc. That crap doesn't work with me. The more you do it, the more it tells me you are a f#cking idiot. Throwing tantrums won't get you what you want.

I know that part is true. Everything I say is true. I'm not trash talking your lineage -- I'm telling the truth. Ma didn't know YKS WCK. His WCK was crap. You just need to look at your san sik to know he made most of them up.

Again, you just show what an idiot you are. I told you the truth but you still don't want to hear it. MT people train like fighters. I told you that if you want to make your WCK functional to go train with real, genuine fighters. This is the best advice anyone could give you. So what is your response? To not take the advice and instead act like an idiot. Now you don't want to train with me but want to fight me.

Consider that behavior, then consider your fantasy posts that Edmund brought up:

"At the time he first proposed taking lessons from Terence, he was talking on the forum about tearing off opponents balls, biting them and trying to biu jee them through the chest. He wrote in the style of an early teen rather than an early 30's man and pretended to be a WC newbie. People were actually questioning his age."

Now, considering this, considering what I know of you and your group, and your behavior now, is it any wonder that I don't want anything to do with you?

I'm not going to go through the posts -- anyone who wants to can do so. But in your own post above you say:

"As for wanting to spar you. Yea thats true too especially after you started talking that crap about my WC not being functional and I need to go learn Muay Thai for two years. You said Muay Thai fighters are real fighters I need to learn from. So at that point I was like Lets just spar buddy. You refused me so I called you a coward. I guess thats the cohersion."

Yup, at the time you were asking about training with us, you began these tactics to try to get your way. You contradict yourself in your own post.

Oh, NOW you want to show up and pay! LOL! Sorry, dude, that boat sailed.

And you're such an idiot that you wonder why I won't have anything to do with you.

t_niehoff

08-14-2009, 08:09 PM

Ultimatewingchun

08-14-2009, 08:37 PM

Yeah, like attracts like, alright. :rolleyes:

It's like every other thread becomes a soap opera.

Jesus....

Yoshiyahu

08-17-2009, 09:03 AM

I am going to answer the most important post.

As for trying to train with you before I even knew about this Forum thats a lie. Thats what you intially said. You said somewhere before I was a member of this site I was sending you emails. not you flip flopping an saying before I started posting. What ever man. I will let that go because I have no idea How to show the date of my first post on here. Anyway. I didn't get your email Until I gave you mines in a PM.

As for the church of Yahushua Mashiyach. I don't know of any church by that name. That is my user name on email to invoke others to call on the true name of the Messiah. Yahushua is the original Hebrew name of Jesus. And Mashiyach means Messiah.

But please humor me on what you mean by cult...What sorta of cult is Burnside and McField apart of?

Please Pm more information about this Teraj guy. Because I know no one by that name...What is his Email address. Please share. The only way I could have contacted him or even spoke with him is he was on another forum like Wingchunfightclub or Martialtalk. Otherwise I never spoken with the man. But in either case please tell me what his email address is so I can verify with out a doubt if that is true.

Anyway man now your twisting and adding stuff to prove your point each day you get more interesting Niehofff. Can't wait to see you pull a rabbit out your arse.