PDA

View Full Version : Can you make what you do work in this?



t_niehoff
03-14-2010, 06:14 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8

Frost
03-14-2010, 08:12 AM
yes i can :)

Matrix
03-14-2010, 09:19 AM
Can you make what you do work in this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8Been there. Done that.

Lee Chiang Po
03-14-2010, 09:30 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8


T, this is what Wing Chun works best against. It and good jujitsu. But wearing the gloves and fighting by obvious rules I suspect that it would only end up with having to fight the same fight. But, even with that, some form of organized fighting system would be very effective. A 3rd rate boxer would have mowed any one of them down. None of these guys showed any fighting skills at all. They just came out windmilling on one another until one went down or one was declared a winner. I didn't see any one of them show a defensive move, just offensive swinging.
I once worked in a number of night clubs in Grand Prairie, Texas, and no one went there for the live band or dancing, but for the fights. When the doors opened they would come through them fighting. At least 2 fights were going on at all times. I felt like I was going 12 rounds, 4 and 5 times a night for 4 nights a week. It kept me busted up and sore. Even wind milling will get through the best defenses now and again, and any bare fist to the face is going to hurt. What we just watched is exactly what you would see all night long in some of those places. Some of those boys would fight 2 or 3 times a night like that, and none of them seemed to have any formal fight training, just a mean attitude.
I think by moving, trapping, and crowding these guys I could punch with them, even wearing the gloves. I wouldn't even attempt to stand toe to toe and punch with them though.

Frost
03-14-2010, 10:06 AM
T, this is what Wing Chun works best against. It and good jujitsu. But wearing the gloves and fighting by obvious rules I suspect that it would only end up with having to fight the same fight. But, even with that, some form of organized fighting system would be very effective. A 3rd rate boxer would have mowed any one of them down. None of these guys showed any fighting skills at all. They just came out windmilling on one another until one went down or one was declared a winner. I didn't see any one of them show a defensive move, just offensive swinging.
I once worked in a number of night clubs in Grand Prairie, Texas, and no one went there for the live band or dancing, but for the fights. When the doors opened they would come through them fighting. At least 2 fights were going on at all times. I felt like I was going 12 rounds, 4 and 5 times a night for 4 nights a week. It kept me busted up and sore. Even wind milling will get through the best defenses now and again, and any bare fist to the face is going to hurt. What we just watched is exactly what you would see all night long in some of those places. Some of those boys would fight 2 or 3 times a night like that, and none of them seemed to have any formal fight training, just a mean attitude.
I think by moving, trapping, and crowding these guys I could punch with them, even wearing the gloves. I wouldn't even attempt to stand toe to toe and punch with them though.

do you understand what theyare seeing, if you do then commentating like you have done above would seem silly, if you didn't stand toe to toe you would fail.
its called milling its used in the paras to test aggression and fighting spirit, you are meant to go flatout for the whole minute you are not meant to show defensive skills.

its not about fighting skills, its tests something much more important to them than simply being about to fight

Pacman
03-14-2010, 11:33 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8

thats probably the easiest. thats like asking if you can avoid a train coming at you.

k gledhill
03-14-2010, 12:03 PM
...Can you make what you do work in this ?...

your kidding right ?:D

SAAMAG
03-14-2010, 05:20 PM
My thoughts exactly.

Lee Chiang Po
03-14-2010, 05:56 PM
do you understand what theyare seeing, if you do then commentating like you have done above would seem silly, if you didn't stand toe to toe you would fail.
its called milling its used in the paras to test aggression and fighting spirit, you are meant to go flatout for the whole minute you are not meant to show defensive skills.

its not about fighting skills, its tests something much more important to them than simply being about to fight


Now that someone has taken the time to explain this, yes, I think I could even at my age. However, like I said, this same thing is what you normally see in bar fighting and such. Maybe that is where they should recruit their troops?

imperialtaichi
03-14-2010, 07:05 PM
The training we did in Guangzhou is way more aggressive than this.

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 07:09 PM
perhaps I am aging....

IMHO, this is not effective, too much struggle...

Do anyone like to share how to finish this in a much shorter time and less moves?

HumbleWCGuy
03-14-2010, 09:18 PM
T, this is what Wing Chun works best against.

Straight beats circle. End of debate.

YungChun
03-14-2010, 09:21 PM
The training we did in Guangzhou is way more aggressive than this.

Totally... We used to use flaming chain saws dipped in gasoline and then lit.. :p:D:o

Frost
03-15-2010, 02:32 AM
perhaps I am aging....

IMHO, this is not effective, too much struggle...

Do anyone like to share how to finish this in a much shorter time and less moves?

again you miss the point its not about effectiveness its a test of heart and aggression, the paras do most of there fighting with rifles they don't do much unarmed combat stuff, this is simply a test not training

Frost
03-15-2010, 02:38 AM
Now that someone has taken the time to explain this, yes, I think I could even at my age. However, like I said, this same thing is what you normally see in bar fighting and such. Maybe that is where they should recruit their troops?

Since they pride themselves on being aggressive they probably do recruit in the local pubs...., and since they are one of the best regiments in the british army i think they probably have both a good selection process and a good training regiime. The paras are known for their aggression and fighting spirit, which is partly trained though this type of training.

And its what you see in a bar fight because bar fights are also normally aggressive in nature and the other guy is trying to take your head off...its also what you normally see in someones fight full contact fight when the adrenaline takes over and they start swinging for the fences...your point is what exactly?As i say its not about fighting its about aggression something the regiment puts a high price on

Frost
03-15-2010, 02:40 AM
Straight beats circle. End of debate.

tyson didn't agree with this as an absolute statement, and i wish someone had told this to the thai guy i sparred at the weekend who dropped me with a nice tight hook punch as i was throwing straights at his head :o

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 04:32 AM
tyson didn't agree with this as an absolute statement, and i wish someone had told this to the thai guy i sparred at the weekend who dropped me with a nice tight hook punch as i was throwing straights at his head :o

Neither Tyson or your sparring partner throw or threw all hooks. There is nothing about the hook itself that makes it able to defeat a straight punch. It is other tactics added to the hooks that make it work head movement, straight punch setups, and so on.

Besides, everyone's comments are in reference to a specific scenario guys with no training running at each other and throwing hooks with no head movement, setups, or strategy. Straight beats circle about covers it in that scenario would you not agree?

t_niehoff
03-15-2010, 04:52 AM
OK, so everyone and their mother can deal with someone coming at them with pure non-stop aggression -- why, then, do we never SEE anyone doing that?

t_niehoff
03-15-2010, 04:53 AM
Straight beats circle. End of debate.

Bzzzz. Wrong.

goju
03-15-2010, 04:54 AM
OK, so everyone and their mother can deal with someone coming at them with pure non-stop aggression -- why, then, do we never SEE anyone doing that?

uh we havent?

t_niehoff
03-15-2010, 04:54 AM
thats probably the easiest. thats like asking if you can avoid a train coming at you.

Trains often run over people.

t_niehoff
03-15-2010, 04:55 AM
uh we havent?

Oh, then please provide me with the link.

goju
03-15-2010, 04:58 AM
Oh, then please provide me with the link.

http://www.vidoemo.com/yvideo.php?i=ZDFSeElwcWuRpMFV5eFE&street-fight-in-turkey-one-vs-all-in-general-d

for example(and there are many others) this turkish boxer is defending himself against more than one guy trying to rush him:D

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:02 AM
OK, so everyone and their mother can deal with someone coming at them with pure non-stop aggression -- why, then, do we never SEE anyone doing that?

ok ill be honest here, seeing as my game is clinch and takedowns to ground i could handle this aggression (i have in the past) but if i had to stay standing with them i would probably get drawn into a slug feast, its the nature of fighting, its why you see so many amature fighters in their first few fights look like this, the adrenaline takes over and technique goes out the window. And it takes alot of full contact experience to get over this instinct

why are you not seeing anyone do this... beacuse people talk a great fight but very few actually do the fighting

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:04 AM
http://www.vidoemo.com/yvideo.php?i=ZDFSeElwcWuRpMFV5eFE&street-fight-in-turkey-one-vs-all-in-general-d

for example(and there are many others) this turkish boxer is defending himself against more than one guy trying to rush him:D

i think he meant from guys on this forum, or wing chun guys in general not from a boxer lol

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 05:07 AM
Bzzzz. Wrong.

In your case, you seem to find a way to lose no matter the situation hence all the self-loathing and hate for WC so I suppose based on your personal experience...

goju
03-15-2010, 05:08 AM
i think he meant from guys on this forum, or wing chun guys in general not from a boxer lol

ah well how the hell are you going to have a video of your own of a guy trying to rip your head off and you defend sucessfully against it?

yeah hang on let me go get my neighbour ill tell him to come at me like a rabid squirrel and video ill tapethe results LOL


this turkish boxer did a good job in this vid though he kept distance, didnt panic, didnt get drawn into staying the pocket and slugging it out and he managed to intimidate his attackers

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 05:11 AM
ah well how the hell are you going to have a video of your own of a guy trying to rip your head off and you defend sucessfully against it?

yeah hang on let me go get my neighbour ill tell him to come at me like a rabid squirrel and video ill tapethe results LOL


this turkish boxer did a good job in this vid though he kept distance, didnt panic, didnt get drawn into staying the pocket and slugging it out and he managed to intimidate his attackers

Exactly, who runs into fighting that sloppy and has a video tape ready typically.

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:11 AM
ah well how the hell are you going to have a video of your own of a guy trying to rip your head off and you defend sucessfully against it?

yeah hang on let me go get my neighbour ill tell him to come at me like a rabid squirrel and video ill tapethe results LOL


this turkish boxer did a good job in this vid though he kept distance, didnt panic, didnt get drawn into staying the pocket and slugging it out and he managed to intimidate his attackers

well if people say then have handled it and can handle it, it must mean they are training against it so someone might have videoed it... afterall people video everyother aspect of training from doing forms to chisao why not this tyoe if training?

Dragonzbane76
03-15-2010, 05:11 AM
haha Looks like the first round of any Toughman contest i've ever been to.

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:14 AM
Neither Tyson or your sparring partner throw or threw all hooks. There is nothing about the hook itself that makes it able to defeat a straight punch. It is other tactics added to the hooks that make it work head movement, straight punch setups, and so on.

Besides, everyone's comments are in reference to a specific scenario guys with no training running at each other and throwing hooks with no head movement, setups, or strategy. Straight beats circle about covers it in that scenario would you not agree?

yes it might, problem is you see so few straight punches in this senario i wonder why that is... i mean virtually every peosons first full conact fight turns into a slug feast like this in the first roiund regardless of how much training they have... why is it such a natural thing to do?

goju
03-15-2010, 05:16 AM
Exactly, who runs into fighting that sloppy and has a video tape ready typically.

exactly this fight was caught by a bystander if that person didnt video tape it no one would know the great turkish street ass kicker:D



assaults like this happen in the blink of an eye you cant go "wait time out let me turn on my camera i happen to carry with me at all times"

goju
03-15-2010, 05:17 AM
yes it might, problem is you see so few straight punches in this senario i wonder why that is... i mean virtually every peosons first full conact fight turns into a slug feast like this in the first roiund regardless of how much training they have... why is it such a natural thing to do?

alot of people cant throw strait punches regardless of how much experience they have or how much they train

its quite odd but such a simple thing seems to be lost art

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:20 AM
alot of people cant throw strait punches regardless of how much experience they have or how much they train

its quite odd but such a simple thing seems to be lost art

they can throw them, they find it hard when it really hit the fan to do so, this might be beacuse looping punches are more natural and carry more power... i don't know but all i do know is that alot of pros look like that in their first fight

goju
03-15-2010, 05:21 AM
well if people say then have handled it and can handle it, it must mean they are training against it so someone might have videoed it... afterall people video everyother aspect of training from doing forms to chisao why not this tyoe if training?

well obviously then this would be a staged scenario which in respect is quite different than some nut rushing you all the sudden and flailing away


i guess a real hard round of full out sparring would be some what similar

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 05:23 AM
yes it might, problem is you see so few straight punches in this senario i wonder why that is... i mean virtually every peosons first full conact fight turns into a slug feast like this in the first roiund regardless of how much training they have... why is it such a natural thing to do?

I think that it is jitters about everything that is going on outside the fight. I fought a few years back after a long layoff (7 years) from competitive fighting. . It was all about being nervous because it has been so long and dealing with the pressure of all the people who came to see me win. I won both fights but I didn't looks as good as I should have.

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:26 AM
well obviously then this would be a staged scenario which in respect is quite different than some nut rushing you all the sudden and flailing away


i guess a real hard round of full out sparring would be some what similar

and that first video form the paras was staged, i think its more the 100percent aggression and full on fighting that T is asking for, rather than videos om ambushes, and yes full out full contact sparring would count i suppose:)

Frost
03-15-2010, 05:27 AM
I think that it is jitters about everything that is going on outside the fight. I fought a few years back after a long layoff (7 years) from competitive fighting. . It was all about being nervous because it has been so long and dealing with the pressure of all the people who came to see me win. I won both fights but I didn't looks as good as I should have.

so if jitters/nevers make us naturally go back to looping punches (even if you have had training )etc, i wonder if the best thing to do would be to train in a system that taught these punches..why fight it why not go with it?

goju
03-15-2010, 05:28 AM
they can throw them, they find it hard when it really hit the fan to do so, this might be beacuse looping punches are more natural and carry more power... i don't know but all i do know is that alot of pros look like that in their first fight

they are more natural BUT you can train strait punches to become natural too


as far as more powerful well that depends on the person

i dont know if you saw the fight science episode on mma but they were measuring punching power on a dummy with some equipment and the amount of force behind bas ruttens strait punch was incredible it was double the amount of force from randys and titos punch and i believe though i may be wrong they used hooks for their attacks

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 05:40 AM
so if jitters/nevers make us naturally go back to looping punches (even if you have had training )etc, i wonder if the best thing to do would be to train in a system that taught these punches..why fight it why not go with it?

I am sorry. Let me clarify. I never went crazy with looping techniques really. I just stayed on the attack the whole time. I used lots of hooks and uppercuts to be certain, but I would also step back back and set up stuff as well. Instead of going 5 or 6 deep on combination I would go 11 or 12 with whatever range dictated.

I knocked out the first guy pretty easily. My second opponent knew that he was in trouble so he would duck below my waste and cover. This was boxing so the ref should have called the fight because the opponent wasn't presenting a target, but he didn't. If I weren't so jittery, I would have been more careful to make him feel like he was in the fight to set up my big shots. As it was shots 3-12 were a waste because of his ducking.



Edit:
Some of it had to do with the fact that the opponent couldn't really stop what I was doing. Had he been better and had a legitimate answer for my techniques. I would have settled down and been more "orthodox."

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 05:55 AM
so if jitters/nevers make us naturally go back to looping punches (even if you have had training )etc, i wonder if the best thing to do would be to train in a system that taught these punches..why fight it why not go with it?

That's a nice thought. That's one of the things that made me gravitate to kickboxing a bit more than WC. I felt like kickboxing was more of a natural art. When people punch at your head you want to move it not tan sao. Now, when I teach, I just teach kickboxing for a while before I start teaching WC. WC is nice but when someone gets in trouble with WC they have to be able to cover up, use standing grappling, and strong punch mechanics from various angles.

I think that WCers can get a little stiff when they get in trouble because they have nothing to go to if that makes sense.

LSWCTN1
03-15-2010, 06:40 AM
The training we did in Guangzhou is way more aggressive than this.

care to elaborate?

sanjuro_ronin
03-15-2010, 07:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8

What is the point of that drill ?
To KO the guy or just to wail on each other?

Frost
03-15-2010, 07:46 AM
What is the point of that drill ?
To KO the guy or just to wail on each other?

neither really from what i understand the paras us it to test aggression and your ability not react under pressure. Basically its 1 minute of balls to the wall attack, you keep going no matter what

Frost
03-15-2010, 07:48 AM
That's a nice thought. That's one of the things that made me gravitate to kickboxing a bit more than WC. I felt like kickboxing was more of a natural art. When people punch at your head you want to move it not tan sao. Now, when I teach, I just teach kickboxing for a while before I start teaching WC. WC is nice but when someone gets in trouble with WC they have to be able to cover up, use standing grappling, and strong punch mechanics from various angles.

I think that WCers can get a little stiff when they get in trouble because they have nothing to go to if that makes sense.

sounds like a good way to teach and very practical. Being about to cover up and not get hit is an art form and a very useful thing to know

sanjuro_ronin
03-15-2010, 07:50 AM
neither really from what i understand the paras us it to test aggression and your ability not react under pressure. Basically its 1 minute of balls to the wall attack, you keep going no matter what

Meh...
We used to do a defense drill like that, where one guy is on the defense and the other just drills him, but just exchanging blows...no so much.

Frost
03-15-2010, 07:52 AM
Meh...
We used to do a defense drill like that, where one guy is on the defense and the other just drills him, but just exchanging blows...no so much.

you have to remember these are the guys the british send in first and call upon if things get hairy for the other troops......they pride themselves on aggression and use this to test it (i think they also use it to foster team spirit, nothing bonds people like a fight)

sanjuro_ronin
03-15-2010, 08:04 AM
you have to remember these are the guys the british send in first and call upon if things get hairy for the other troops......they pride themselves on aggression and use this to test it (i think they also use it to foster team spirit, nothing bonds people like a fight)

yeah, I think the marines use pugil stick matches for the same reason.

Frost
03-15-2010, 08:07 AM
yeah, I think the marines use pugil stick matches for the same reason.

paras are old fashioned they prefer to beat each other up with their fists :)

interestingly from the few guys i have trained with who served in the paras they did very little unarmed combat apart from the milling, when they went to belfast they did some basic wrist lock stuff but that was it... things might have changed now but back them the emphasis on empty hand stuff was simply not there

sanjuro_ronin
03-15-2010, 08:12 AM
paras are old fashioned they prefer to beat each other up with their fists :)

interestingly from the few guys i have trained with who served in the paras they did very little unarmed combat apart from the milling, when they went to belfast they did some basic wrist lock stuff but that was it... things might have changed now but back them the emphasis on empty hand stuff was simply not there

My time in the army has very little H2H other than what I did on the side and that was frowned upon because I was a sniper and could damage my trigger finger.

Frost
03-15-2010, 08:16 AM
That's a nice thought. That's one of the things that made me gravitate to kickboxing a bit more than WC. I felt like kickboxing was more of a natural art. When people punch at your head you want to move it not tan sao. Now, when I teach, I just teach kickboxing for a while before I start teaching WC. WC is nice but when someone gets in trouble with WC they have to be able to cover up, use standing grappling, and strong punch mechanics from various angles.

I think that WCers can get a little stiff when they get in trouble because they have nothing to go to if that makes sense.

so i have to ask just out of curiosity why do you still teach wing chun if you found kickboxing is more natural, do you feel wing chun covers an area of combat better than kickboxing?

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 08:22 AM
sounds like a good way to teach and very practical. Being about to cover up and not get hit is an art form and a very useful thing to know

I can't take total credit for the approach. The family who developed my art took the approach that it was necessary to learn basic martial arts before branching into other arts. They generally taught a basic Southern fist before allowing people to specialize in WC, Five Animals, or various southern animal fists. They felt that WC was too specialized to work alone.

Because of today's environment. Kickboxing needs to be taught to people first as a matter of practicality. The kickboxing works well as a replacement for the southern fist as it is ultimately it can be thought of as an effective blend of the Southern fist, basic mongolian wrestling, chin na, western boxing, and Wing Chun.

Kickboxing is so simple and effective just learning to combination punch, power punch, hold a good stance, and cover will take someone far. One of the most common and annoying problems that I see during WC chi sao is the throat hits. Had these people had 5 minutes of kickboxing training, they would put their chins down and not get hit in the throat repeatedly. It is that sort of display that has convinced me that WC must be taught with an expanded curriculum or it is destined to fail.

Frost
03-15-2010, 08:26 AM
I can't take total credit for the approach. The family who developed my art took the approach that it was necessary to learn basic martial arts before branching into other arts. They generally taught a basic Southern fist before allowing people to specialize in WC, Five Animals, or various southern animal fists. They felt that WC was too specialized to work alone.

Because of today's environment. Kickboxing needs to be taught to people first as a matter of practicality. The kickboxing works well as a replacement for the southern fist as it is ultimately it can be thought of as an effective blend of the Southern fist, basic mongolian wrestling, chin na, western boxing, and Wing Chun.

Kickboxing is so simple and effective just learning to combination punch, power punch, hold a good stance, and cover will take someone far. One of the most common and annoying problems that I see during WC chi sao is the throat hits. Had these people had 5 minutes of kickboxing training, they would put their chins down and not get hit in the throat repeatedly. It is that sort of display that has convinced me that WC must be taught with an expanded curriculum or it is destined to fail.


I have seen something similar, one school i trained at teach hung gar and choyleefut before the short hand styles bakmei and yungling, its a good way of teaching

sanjuro_ronin
03-15-2010, 08:37 AM
I have seen something similar, one school i trained at teach hung gar and choyleefut before the short hand styles bakmei and yungling, its a good way of teaching

Yep, same here.
My current HK sifu does that, his brother is a SPM man and when the core is developed in HK, the SPM is introduced.

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 10:11 AM
so i have to ask just out of curiosity why do you still teach wing chun if you found kickboxing is more natural, do you feel wing chun covers an area of combat better than kickboxing?


Kickboxing > WC

Kickboxing + WC > Kickboxing

Wing Chun is completely and utterly devastating and a street fighting art and quite useful in the ring. WC can devistate multiple attackers bit kickboxing does not. The problem with WC is that it has a very particular structure that can be collapsed because it is a system of parries and counter attacks from a defensive perspective. Once one has the kickboxing infrastructure in place WC becomes natural and logical.

SAAMAG
03-15-2010, 10:41 AM
Kickboxing > WC

Kickboxing + WC > Kickboxing

Wing Chun is completely and utterly devastating and a street fighting art and quite useful in the ring. WC can devistate multiple attackers bit kickboxing does not. The problem with WC is that it has a very particular structure that can be collapsed because it is a system of parries and counter attacks from a defensive perspective. Once one has the kickboxing infrastructure in place WC becomes natural and logical.

I think others on this forum might disagree with your assessment. Perhaps you might rephrase that for you kickboxing is better than wing chun and both of them together are better than either one individually. This way we don't offend certain people...

I think that high level wing chun can prove to be a devastating art, and that it's not so much the problem of the system that is causing people to get hit, its the person's inability to learn from their sparring and free-form drilling and to adapt their personal iterations of the art to work for them that is the problem.

When I re-visited my muay thai gym while home on leave--I remember talking to some of the "new" guys whom I haven't met about my training in the past. When I mentioned wing chun one of them immediately said "Oh you do that?! -- I heard that you were one of the best guys here and that you came from a kung fu background -- but I didn't think it was wing chun because all the wing chun guys that come here to "test" themselves suck!" I asked him to elaborate and he said this guy kept coming in asking to fight, and that he was from the local wing chun branch. His performance was said to be very mechanical, with no movement. He didn't look how do you say...comfortable?

So I can't identify with what you're saying in terms of boxing, muay thai, kickboxing, sanshou and the like feeling natural, and having a better setup for utilizing the body's natural movement with new students. That said--I think that Wing Chun provides a unique way of re-learning the capabilities of just what proper alignment and structure can do...even if it doesn't at first feel natural.

And the idea of learning more "longfisted" systems before learning the short-power systems (e.g. CLF-->WC) is a good pedagogical model and has been around for a long time. You're just using a western system with an eastern system..which some people again may have problems with because it's "not gung fu and the systems don't have the same core philosophies" but if it is proving to work--than what else can be said, right?

HumbleWCGuy
03-15-2010, 11:10 AM
I think others on this forum might disagree with your assessment. Perhaps you might rephrase that for you kickboxing is better than wing chun and both of them together are better than either one individually. This way we don't offend certain people...


It really just depends on whether one has a broad or narrow conception of WC. Generally, it seems that WC is viewed as a very incomplete art in which case I assert that it was never meant to be taught as a stand-alone art.


In the case that someone teaches and was taught a more expanded WC cirriculum that contains boxing and kickboxing elements my assertion would prove false.

Frost
03-15-2010, 12:17 PM
Yep, same here.
My current HK sifu does that, his brother is a SPM man and when the core is developed in HK, the SPM is introduced.

i actually know of a sifu that teaches wing chun first then teaches yung ling because he feels wing chun is fine but lacks real power.... but i won't go there :)

SAAMAG
03-15-2010, 12:42 PM
i actually know of a sifu that teaches wing chun first then teaches yung ling because he feels wing chun is fine but lacks real power.... but i won't go there :)

I think you already did....ouch!

FWIW though, I had quite the enlightening experience over the weekend. I met with another sifu of wing chun--who practices with an internal mindset. This guy hit harder than anyone I've ever felt before; and while he was a big guy...when he illustrated for me a short palm strike to the chest (with phone book in hand) it didn't knock me back but rather just hurt inside my chest for a while. It felt like the phone book wasn't there to be honest.

So I'd have to admit that while the majority of little guys (like myself) who can't generate power in wing chun as much as say--a right cross (to cite the example given in my other thread); there are some individuals who can. Granted the only person that's proven it to me at this point is a big guy, feeling it first hand is something that conjecture can do nothing to disprove. It can be said that because his mass was larger that from a physics point of view that's what allowed more kinetic transfer...but I"m going to give it a go again and continue to train with him for guidance on how to make my wing chun better. He says that I move like a WSL guy...which is quite the compliment in my opinion--but he says if I relax more I'll find that I'm capable of a lot more.

Again, for what its worth.

anerlich
03-15-2010, 04:14 PM
So I'd have to admit that while the majority of little guys (like myself) who can't generate power in wing chun as much as say--a right cross (to cite the example given in my other thread); there are some individuals who can.

My first instructor was a small guy, about 5' 5" and pretty slight. But he could hurt you through 3 telephone books with a WC punch. He did however get a 2nd dan in Goju Ryu prior to this and used to break large quantities of bricks and tiles with his fists.

SAAMAG
03-15-2010, 05:09 PM
But was your teachers wing chun punch his "hardest hitting" punch? That's where the other thread was going.

Same individual, varying effects from various punches...which was his hardest punch? Ya know?

anerlich
03-15-2010, 07:27 PM
But was your teachers wing chun punch his "hardest hitting" punch? That's where the other thread was going.

Same individual, varying effects from various punches...which was his hardest punch? Ya know?

Good question. After experiencing his WC punch, I wasn't all that keen to be on the wrong end of any of the others. :D

He could break 8 untreated roof tiles with a backfist. I guess the bottom line is that he could hit plenty hard enough for defense situations with quite a variety of strikes.

YungChun
03-15-2010, 11:22 PM
It really just depends on whether one has a broad or narrow conception of WC. Generally, it seems that WC is viewed as a very incomplete art in which case I assert that it was never meant to be taught as a stand-alone art.




In the case that someone teaches and was taught a more expanded WC cirriculum that contains boxing and kickboxing elements my assertion would prove false.

Good grief..

There are more leg techniques than in TKD...

There are more techniques/tools than I can use or need after many years of training..

WCK's longest weapon is a side kick, its shortest is a shoulder butt. (much wider range than kick boxing)

WCK trains energy, position and structure, kinesthetic awareness, etc, along with simply hitting stuff, which it also does.

But nope, that is not enough, apparently we need to add in kick boxing... :rolleyes: LOL

This reminds me of folks who go to a gourmet restaurant and after being served they ask for ketchup... LOL

http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/exhibitionist/ketchup.jpg

Yeah... Much better now..


The problem with WC is that it has a very particular structure that can be collapsed because it is a system of parries and counter attacks from a defensive perspective.


Defensive???????? Good Lord.. No.
Oye....:eek:

HumbleWCGuy
03-16-2010, 03:58 AM
Good grief..

There are more leg techniques than in TKD...

There are more techniques/tools than I can use or need after many years of training..

WCK's longest weapon is a side kick, its shortest is a shoulder butt. (much wider range than kick boxing)

WCK trains energy, position and structure, kinesthetic awareness, etc, along with simply hitting stuff, which it also does.

But nope, that is not enough, apparently we need to add in kick boxing... :rolleyes: LOL

This reminds me of folks who go to a gourmet restaurant and after being served they ask for ketchup... LOL



Yeah... Much better now..



Defensive???????? Good Lord.. No.
Oye....:eek:

You can rant all you want but WC has a bad reputation for a reason. If you say that your WC works great then I am happy for you, but that doesn't change the fact that WC fighters go to mma and kickboxing gyms and get smoked day in and day out.

A WC fighter doesn't need to learn kickboxing as it should already contain most kickboxing components anyway. WCers just need to learn some finer points about stance, boxing punches, the plum, hard blocking, and power kicking. The next time that you are doing Chi Sao with your students and you hit them in the throat 36 times ask yourself if they had five minutes of kickboxing if they would be standing there with their throat exposed to be hit repeatedly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaP1X-lEtgc The more he gets hit the higher his chin goes.

Frost
03-16-2010, 04:02 AM
You can rant all you want but WC has a bad reputation for a reason. If you say that your WC works great then I am happy for you, but that doesn't change the fact that WC fighters go to mma and kickboxing gyms and get smoked day in and day out.

A WC fighter doesn't need to learn kickboxing as it should already contain most kickboxing components anyway. WCers just need to learn some finer points about stance, boxing punches, the plum, and power kicking. The next time that you are doing Chi Sao with your students and you hit them in the throat 36 times ask yourself if they had five minutes of kickboxing if they would be standing there with their throat exposed to be hit repeatedly.

actually to be fair he said his wing chun has loads of tools... he never said he could make those tools actually work:D

goju
03-16-2010, 04:19 AM
wait did he say wc has more options with leg attacks than tkd does?:eek:

Frost
03-16-2010, 04:28 AM
wait did he say wc has more options with leg attacks than tkd does?:eek:

thats nothing on another post someone was saying how basic TKD is when compared to wing chun :D

goju
03-16-2010, 04:47 AM
thats nothing on another post someone was saying how basic TKD is when compared to wing chun :D

i honestly sat here with my mouth open in shock...

just wow man lol:eek: and i thought ive heard it all

i like wc i really do BUT tkd has way and i mean WAY(repeat this word a thousand times) more kicking techniques and leg attack options in it than wc does

hell i dont think ive seen any known kick that tkd doesnt have in it and they are even inventing newer ones as well through out the years


as far as being simpler in comparison um again..... no

chois goal was to exapand on shotokan karate and add more to it whereas wc goal was to simplify kung fu in order to make it easier to learn and more direct or at least thats what ive been told

wc isnt supposed to be more complicated and complex that wasnt the idea with the style

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 05:35 AM
Ok, now, don't take the fact that I am a 3rd degree BB in ITF TKD weight in on this but, where does WC have MORE variety of kicks than TKD ??
Heck, a case can be made that TKD has MORE variety of hands than WC.
TKD has more kicks than I care to mention, on subsystem has 365, one for everyday of the year ( no joking).
As for hands, TKD teaches to hit with every part of the hand and fist and in every position, including jumping and jump spinning hand techniques.

I know that most of you probably have WTF in mind when you think TKD, but even WTF has a huge variety of moves, though olympic TKD seems to not make a case for that.

bennyvt
03-16-2010, 06:07 AM
are you saying tkd is made from karate. I thought the general got a bunch of korean ma togeather and added them togeather.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 06:29 AM
are you saying tkd is made from karate. I thought the general got a bunch of korean ma togeather and added them togeather.

Yes, Choi created TKD from his training in Shotokan.
That is the correct history, if not the official one, lOL !

HumbleWCGuy
03-16-2010, 07:43 AM
Ok, now, don't take the fact that I am a 3rd degree BB in ITF TKD weight in on this but, where does WC have MORE variety of kicks than TKD ??
Heck, a case can be made that TKD has MORE variety of hands than WC.
TKD has more kicks than I care to mention, on subsystem has 365, one for everyday of the year ( no joking).
As for hands, TKD teaches to hit with every part of the hand and fist and in every position, including jumping and jump spinning hand techniques.

I know that most of you probably have WTF in mind when you think TKD, but even WTF has a huge variety of moves, though olympic TKD seems to not make a case for that.

It really just depends on whether someone is operating from a more expanded definition of WC or the narrow one that is often applied. IMO, it isn't worth arguing about.

Frost
03-16-2010, 07:58 AM
Ok, now, don't take the fact that I am a 3rd degree BB in ITF TKD weight in on this but, where does WC have MORE variety of kicks than TKD ??
Heck, a case can be made that TKD has MORE variety of hands than WC.
TKD has more kicks than I care to mention, on subsystem has 365, one for everyday of the year ( no joking).
As for hands, TKD teaches to hit with every part of the hand and fist and in every position, including jumping and jump spinning hand techniques.

I know that most of you probably have WTF in mind when you think TKD, but even WTF has a huge variety of moves, though olympic TKD seems to not make a case for that.

i think alot of people like to think there system is special, deeper, more profound etc than others, even if they have never trained in those arts.

What is funny is that bigger is not always better , when it comes to maertial artsand more is not always better in fighting

chusauli
03-16-2010, 09:29 AM
Yes, Choi created TKD from his training in Shotokan.
That is the correct history, if not the official one, lOL !

Sure, take a look at the book "Tae Kwon Do - A Killing Art: The Untold History of Tae Kwon Do" ~ Alex Gillis (Author).

Funny thing is Choi made up stuff continuously and so many people believe it. But that doesn't happen with WCK, right? LOL!

WCK does have a lot of close range kicks with all different parts of the foot. If you try to break it down to 8 kicks, 8 parts of the foot, and with variations of footwork, different targets and power, one has quite a few different kicks...maybe over the 365...

SAAMAG
03-16-2010, 09:35 AM
See I always thought TKD evolved from Taek Kyon. At least that's what I learned when I was a kid.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 09:45 AM
Sure, take a look at the book "Tae Kwon Do - A Killing Art: The Untold History of Tae Kwon Do" ~ Alex Gillis (Author).

Funny thing is Choi made up stuff continuously and so many people believe it. But that doesn't happen with WCK, right? LOL!

WCK does have a lot of close range kicks with all different parts of the foot. If you try to break it down to 8 kicks, 8 parts of the foot, and with variations of footwork, different targets and power, one has quite a few different kicks...maybe over the 365...

I was just gonna suggest that book Robert :)
My old teacher Park ( mentioned in that book) told me that the vast majority of the "inner" stuff is bang on.
As for the kicks, lets be honest though, IF were are speaking of typical curriculum, WC has nothing compared to TKD, TKD has a HUGE curriculum, over 30 forms empty handed forms alone.

chusauli
03-16-2010, 09:45 AM
See I always thought TKD evolved from Taek Kyon. At least that's what I learned when I was a kid.

LOL! You were sold a bill of goods! Tae Kyon doesn't look much like TKD, Choi chose the name TKD because it sounded like Tae Kyon.

Modern Tae Kyon is evolving and borrowing different elements.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 09:45 AM
See I always thought TKD evolved from Taek Kyon. At least that's what I learned when I was a kid.

Nah, BUT Choi did get some kicks from Taekyon, that is true.

chusauli
03-16-2010, 09:54 AM
I was just gonna suggest that book Robert :)
My old teacher Park ( mentioned in that book) told me that the vast majority of the "inner" stuff is bang on.
As for the kicks, lets be honest though, IF were are speaking of typical curriculum, WC has nothing compared to TKD, TKD has a HUGE curriculum, over 30 forms empty handed forms alone.

Sick minds think alike! :)

Yes, it s a huge curriculum, but in the realm of WCK kicks, you have permutations which create various matrices and would increase the kicks to a large number. For example - 8 kicks X 8 parts of foot X 3 heights X inside/outside X 8 steps X snapping/Stomping power would be expressed mathematically as (8 X 8 X 3 X 2 X 8 X 2) = 6144.

That's a lotta kicks. Personal ability, flexibility, timing, training, and ability to use it in combat would of course probably limit that.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 10:02 AM
Sick minds think alike! :)

Yes, it s a huge curriculum, but in the realm of WCK kicks, you have permutations which create various matrices and would increase the kicks to a large number. For example - 8 kicks X 8 parts of foot X 3 heights X inside/outside X 8 steps X snapping/Stomping power would be expressed mathematically as (8 X 8 X 3 X 2 X 8 X 2) = 6144.

That's a lotta kicks. Personal ability, flexibility, timing, training, and ability to use it in combat would of course probably limit that.

Agreed, add to that, jumping, spinning, hopping and stepping and you have the CORE of TKD !
LOL !

SAAMAG
03-16-2010, 10:05 AM
Agreed, add to that, jumping, spinning, hopping and stepping and you have the CORE of TKD !
LOL !

See...to me a side kick is a side kick. Elevation doesn't matter. Front or rear foot doesn't matter. I would say its a different kick though when you add major elements though like jumping, spinning, or both.

Pacman
03-16-2010, 10:06 AM
i heard that TKD was influenced by northern shaolin. those high jump kicks were made for kicking people riding horseback.

btw, didn't you guys know that the ancient Korean Hwa Rang invented Kung Fu and Karate?!

http://www.allmartialarts.com/KIXCO/History/history/map.htm


You can rant all you want but WC has a bad reputation for a reason. If you say that your WC works great then I am happy for you, but that doesn't change the fact that WC fighters go to mma and kickboxing gyms and get smoked day in and day out.


WC has a bad rep because of the teachers.

its a very interpretive art which can be a bad thing when most teachers gain students by talking well and writing books and not by really having any fighting skill.

boxing, kickboxing, mma etc. they all have one thing in common-- being a sport. this serves as a quality control for their arts. the competition aspect ensures the physical fitness of their fighters which is a very important thing that many WC teachers neglect

so its not the art of WC that is lacking that is the problem.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 10:10 AM
See...to me a side kick is a side kick. Elevation doesn't matter. Front or rear foot doesn't matter. I would say its a different kick though when you add major elements though like jumping, spinning, or both.

Actually, ITF TKD side kick is NOT your typical side kick, matter of fact, the rear leg kicking of ITF is NOT what you see in most places.
So a side kick is not just a side kick.

HumbleWCGuy
03-16-2010, 10:12 AM
i heard that TKD was influenced by northern shaolin. those high jump kicks were made for kicking people riding horseback.

btw, didn't you guys know that the ancient Korean Hwa Rang invented Kung Fu and Karate?!

http://www.allmartialarts.com/KIXCO/History/history/map.htm



WC has a bad rep because of the teachers.

its a very interpretive art which can be a bad thing when most teachers gain students by talking well and writing books and not by really having any fighting skill.

boxing, kickboxing, mma etc. they all have one thing in common-- being a sport. this serves as a quality control for their arts. the competition aspect ensures the physical fitness of their fighters which is a very important thing that many WC teachers neglect

so its not the art of WC that is lacking that is the problem.

Yea, that's why if I were going to make any changes to WC as an art, I would establish a full-contact league where points were awarded for trapping. That way, all this bickering would stop. Either teachers are running decent fighters to events consistently or they aren't . Bickering over terminology, whose WC is "real/complete," or whether it even works at all are all kind of nonsense and more fighting would bring it all to light.


Edit: I would also have kids sparring as a priority where strong technique is awarded rather than people receiving points for throwing blind, inconsequential techniques.

Lee Chiang Po
03-16-2010, 10:26 AM
I think that the fewer techniques you have to master the better. There are just so many that you can use anyway. If you train a hand full of special, or effective techniques you can come closer to mastering them than if you trained an endless number. I have black belts in jap jujitsu. There are something like 60 techniques, but 10 and 12 applications for each. Amounting to something like between 600 and 700 different applications. No way in heck will anyone use them all. Most really good fighters will have a small arsenal, but they will have mastered all their weapons.
Wing Chun is like that. There is not a really great number of weapon techniques, but there seems to be an endless application of them. It is not robotic unless you make it robotic. And it is not such a short range weapon either. If you are close enough to strike me, I am close enough to strike you back. One thing that has me wondering is the assumption that a Wing Chun punch lacks power. It does lack power if you don't know how to use it I guess. If you are learning Wing Chun from a book you are not likely to realize all this for a while, and if you don't train it you will not realize it. For power expended, the WC punch is the most efficient of all. You can really stick some power into it. We are not talking about real short 1 and 2 inch punches here, You have to realize that speed has to be attained in order to equate power, and you have to have several inches of movement to achieve this speed. But, that is all you need.

chusauli
03-16-2010, 11:08 AM
Agreed, add to that, jumping, spinning, hopping and stepping and you have the CORE of TKD !
LOL !

It's true! That's why one person can never learn it all. It's endless. And many times where people argue 1 art superior to others is moot.

Even in the Integrated Eskrima I do, there are 13 footwork patterns, 12 angles, 14 'styles', 3 heights, 3 basic striking qualities, and the art is basically 19656 movements at the first level.

All arts that teach like this have to be "conceptual" in nature - who is going to do all 19656 permutations? But applying it is basically 1 strike landing. So it is for WCK's fist and kick.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 11:11 AM
It's true! That's why one person can never learn it all. It's endless. And many times where people argue 1 art superior to others is moot.

Even in the Integrated Eskrima I do, there are 13 footwork patterns, 12 angles, 14 'styles', 3 heights, 3 basic striking qualities, and the art is basically 19656 movements at the first level.

All arts that teach like this have to be "conceptual" in nature - who is going to do all 19656 permutations? But applying it is basically 1 strike landing. So it is for WCK's fist and kick.

Indeed, I did Pekiti-Tirsia kali and ,well, I agree, too many !!
That is why it is silly to say on style is more complicated than another or anything along those lines.

SAAMAG
03-16-2010, 11:25 AM
Actually, ITF TKD side kick is NOT your typical side kick, matter of fact, the rear leg kicking of ITF is NOT what you see in most places.
So a side kick is not just a side kick.

I'm saying side kick = side kick amongst different styles or varying iterations of the same style persay.

I'm saying that the side kick is done in the same fundamental form--the foot is parallel or slightly pointed downward, the edge of the heel is kicking, the leg thrusts out from the hip. Doing it the front leg is a side kick, doing it with the rear leg is a side kick. You'll have different setups of course, hence where people want to make one kick into 5...but to me...I like things simple. It's a side kick.

Otherwise you get crazy naming a different kick for every minute difference, when it's fundamentally the same kick just with different setups or coming form different angles.

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 11:34 AM
I'm saying side kick = side kick amongst different styles or varying iterations of the same style persay.

I'm saying that the side kick is done in the same fundamental form--the foot is parallel or slightly pointed downward, the edge of the heel is kicking, the leg thrusts out from the hip. Doing it the front leg is a side kick, doing it with the rear leg is a side kick. You'll have different setups of course, hence where people want to make one kick into 5...but to me...I like things simple. It's a side kick.

Otherwise you get crazy naming a different kick for every minute difference, when it's fundamentally the same kick just with different setups or coming form different angles.

Crazy talk, only ITF TKD has the AUTHENTIC side kick !!

YungChun
03-16-2010, 11:42 AM
Ok, now, don't take the fact that I am a 3rd degree BB in ITF TKD weight in on this but, where does WC have MORE variety of kicks than TKD ??
Heck, a case can be made that TKD has MORE variety of hands than WC.
TKD has more kicks than I care to mention, on subsystem has 365, one for everyday of the year ( no joking).
As for hands, TKD teaches to hit with every part of the hand and fist and in every position, including jumping and jump spinning hand techniques.

I know that most of you probably have WTF in mind when you think TKD, but even WTF has a huge variety of moves, though olympic TKD seems to not make a case for that.

WCK has tons of, not just kicks, but leg techniques.. The leg work is quite intricate but I don't know how many are familiar with that aspect.. Folks interested can look it up, or maybe I will if I get the time.

The point was that there is lots of "stuff" and in different ranges for folks who want to do WCK and no need to add more to it if you can or choose to use what's there...

YungChun
03-16-2010, 11:44 AM
Yes, Choi created TKD from his training in Shotokan.
That is the correct history, if not the official one, lOL !

Ex karate guy here too.. The forms are almost identical... Also similar to Tang Soo Do as I recall..

sanjuro_ronin
03-16-2010, 12:05 PM
Ex karate guy here too.. The forms are almost identical... Also similar to Tang Soo Do as I recall..

Heresay !! Blasphemy !!!
:D

goju
03-16-2010, 02:51 PM
See I always thought TKD evolved from Taek Kyon. At least that's what I learned when I was a kid.

like sanjuro said they added some kicks from taek kyon which was this very athletic dance type of game koreans played


largely alot of koreans dont wish to admit tkd came from karate because of their obvious dislike of all things japanese

however they dont realize karate is an okinawan art not a japanese one:D

if this misconception was cleared up they would be more open to admitting teh truth

grasshopper 2.0
03-16-2010, 08:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8


The answer would be yes. Other than adrenaline, there's nothing much else. Even the chi-sao (ignoring everything else at our training disposable) is more "hardcore" than this.

Phil Redmond
03-16-2010, 09:19 PM
ok ill be honest here, seeing as my game is clinch and takedowns to ground i could handle this aggression (i have in the past) but if i had to stay standing with them i would probably get drawn into a slug feast, its the nature of fighting, its why you see so many amature fighters in their first few fights look like this, the adrenaline takes over and technique goes out the window. And it takes alot of full contact experience to get over this instinct

why are you not seeing anyone do this... beacuse people talk a great fight but very few actually do the fighting
Exactly, yet people say that WC shouldn't be pressure tested. And it it is it isn't WC :rolleyes:

sihing
03-16-2010, 09:44 PM
Exactly, yet people say that WC shouldn't be pressure tested. And it it is it isn't WC :rolleyes:

People have to pressure test, not the art. Without people all MA would not exist, because they are nonliving things. So when I go out and spar someone it is me doing the sparring, not WC, Muay Thai or any other MA. WC is just the training system I've choosen to learn, that's it. I'm all for pressure testing, to what level is up to the individual based on their intention.

James

Frost
03-17-2010, 03:23 AM
Exactly, yet people say that WC shouldn't be pressure tested. And it it is it isn't WC :rolleyes:

quite right, and saying its the person not the art being pressure tested is a cop out. It is both being tested and if alot of different people fail under pressure using the same art then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with that style or the way it is taught.

likewise if alot of people pressure test a system and it sems to work in the majority of cases (like BJJ) then the system is sound.

HumbleWCGuy
03-17-2010, 04:07 AM
quite right, and saying its the person not the art being pressure tested is a cop out. It is both being tested and if alot of different people fail under pressure using the same art then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with that style or the way it is taught.

likewise if alot of people pressure test a system and it sems to work in the majority of cases (like BJJ) then the system is sound.

To be honest, I think that people overestimate the effectiveness of BJJ in general. There are a lot of schools that teach nothing but sport Bjj or just 6 months of self defense to go along with their sport BJJ. That is not a sound tactic, but BJJ is getting away with it because there are so many long-time strikers who are learning the art and don't care about and need the upright aspects.

I believe that as we see more children come up through BJJ we will begin to see a lot more people who are good sport players who might not necessarily be good fighters. In addition, I think that a lot of the early success of BJJ in this country was due to the complete ignorance of the upright arts. That isn't the case anymore. IMO, BJJ needs to step it up or the notion that it is sounder than something else will start to change.

Frost
03-17-2010, 04:45 AM
To be honest, I think that people overestimate the effectiveness of BJJ in general. There are a lot of schools that teach nothing but sport Bjj or just 6 months of self defense to go along with their sport BJJ. That is not a sound tactic, but BJJ is getting away with it because there are so many long-time strikers who are learning the art and don't care about and need the upright aspects.

I believe that as we see more children come up through BJJ we will begin to see a lot more people who are good sport players who might not necessarily be good fighters. In addition, I think that a lot of the early success of BJJ in this country was due to the complete ignorance of the upright arts. That isn't the case anymore. IMO, BJJ needs to step it up or the notion that it is sounder than something else will start to change.

BJJ as a delivery system (god i sound like Terrance!) is the most dominiate ground style there is, be it MMA, sport fighting or self defence. It dominates in MMA and sport grappling, At the last ADCC championships (the permier no gi championship in the world with rules that favour no single style) all but 1 weight catagory winner was a BJJ blackbelt.

in the UFC i think all but 2 title holders have BJJ blackbelts, and the others train it extensivly.

The upright styles might not be as ignorant, but unless they train BJJ on the ground they still get destroyed down there, now guys with a good judo or sambo background might be ok with the BJJ guys on the ground...but how many champion level fighters do you know that just do sambo or judo? Apart from fedor and the heat i can't think of many others. even the japanese guys that have a judo and shooot background also train in BJJ.


The problem can be (as you point out) people only training the sport grappling aspect of it and then thinking they can fight in MMA without making changes and you are right we are and will see this more, it doesn't mean BJJ is any less effective, it just means people are only training one aspect of the art..

They are still using the sameart as those BJJ guys fighting in MMA, but the tactics and the techniques they use are different when they are not getting punched in the face

HumbleWCGuy
03-17-2010, 06:26 AM
JKD was super devistating when it came out. Guys with 6 months of JKD were destroying masters in Karate. Everyone caught up by adding boxing to their fighting style and developing more realistic stances. Everyone will catch up to BJJ and in 10 to twenty years and it will become more apparent that a lot of BJJ black belts are legitimately non-fighters. I am not criticizing BJJ as much as I just see this as the way of things.

Frost
03-17-2010, 06:34 AM
JKD was super devistating when it came out. Guys with 6 months of JKD were destroying masters in Karate. Everyone caught up by adding boxing to their fighting style and developing more realistic stances. Everyone will catch up to BJJ and in 10 to twenty years and it will become more apparent that a lot of BJJ black belts are legitimately non-fighters. I am not criticizing BJJ as much as I just see this as the way of things.

i don't agree simply because BJJ has been around in the mianstream for a couple of decades and is still head and shoulders above all other ground arts.

Also unlike jkd there is in BJJ an inbuild safety switch, you have to compete in BJJ in grappling, if you are a BJJ blackbelt that means you can grapple and beat other BJJ blackbelts.. does that mean you are a great fighter no but it means you have real grappling skills and have competed.

Still we will have to see how it pans out :)

HumbleWCGuy
03-17-2010, 06:42 AM
i don't agree simply because BJJ has been around in the mianstream for a couple of decades and is still head and shoulders above all other ground arts.

Also unlike jkd there is in BJJ an inbuild safety switch, you have to compete in BJJ in grappling, if you are a BJJ blackbelt that means you can grapple and beat other BJJ blackbelts.. does that mean you are a great fighter no but it means you have real grappling skills and have competed.

Still we will have to see how it pans out :)

That's a good point. Most arts just don't have quality control. We are still arguing about whether boxing is a good idea on a WC board which is unbelievable.

To your point, look at this prominent JKD man who has written books.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDhnjrnr6cs

Frost
03-17-2010, 07:11 AM
That's a good point. Most arts just don't have quality control. We are still arguing about whether boxing is a good idea on a WC board which is unbelievable.

To your point, look at this prominent JKD man who has written books.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDhnjrnr6cs

i like some of what i saw, some i didn't but as you say they are sparring and thats a good thing

former JKD guys like matt thornton, paul sharp etc all advocate sparring, and even vunaks crew(the street fighting HKE's guys) spar, and all those top guys with him have aleast a bjj purple belt so we can see how they feel about so called alive sparring and grappling

sihing
03-17-2010, 11:30 AM
quite right, and saying its the person not the art being pressure tested is a cop out. It is both being tested and if alot of different people fail under pressure using the same art then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with that style or the way it is taught.

likewise if alot of people pressure test a system and it sems to work in the majority of cases (like BJJ) then the system is sound.

I think one of the misconceptions of Wing Chun is that it is a style. I've been thru some reeducation over the last few years, and today my view is that Wing Chun is unique in the Martial Arts, in that it is not a style at all, it doesn't tell you what to do vs this or that attack, how to hold your hands, or stand this way or that. It has a general strategy and idea of attack, but other than that, it is free to be used in anyway shape or form. Of course if you are familiar with the system, you would recognize it in action, but it would be hard to do so. The problem with most WC out there is #1 the practitioners, they are TRYING to display or be the style when they fight. I've seen so many video's and live demos of it that you can see the unnaturalness of their actions coming out, as can be seen from a vid like this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-PTi3SptEI, I'm not saying everyone in WC is like this but I see it alot.

The question I ask, if you look at the curriculum, how does one take what you are doing in class, chi sau, laap sau, dummy and such, as application, you can't but you can take the skills you learn, the ideas and body mechanics/structures learned and apply them easy. It's like a training regimend to get strong/fit in the gym, so you can perform better in life, maintain health and prevent injury, or like using a sharpening tool to sharpen your axe or saw, it's something that helps your natural action in combat become better, more efficient and effective, that's it. So in essence I don't believe a failure or success of someone training in WC in sparring or combat is an indication of the effectiveness of the system, rather it's an inidication of the individuals effectiveness, because true effectiveness in combat is subjective. Two factors play a role, your own skills and your opponents skills and both's persons ability to utilize them when they need to. Against some I will be easily able to handle their pressure and utilize my tools, against others it won't happen as easy, that's a fact for each of us here. Basically the way WC is taught generally is incorrect. I've seen lots, experienced lots of WC outside of my lineage, trained two lineages myself, and besides my own lineage there are a few others that teach it well, but not many. #2 problem is the teachers or leaders of these lineages are more about selling membership and keeping the sheep in line, than teaching what the system teaches and how it works, IMO of course.

BJJ works very well, for a couple of basic reasons, one it's sophisticated and well thought out, two once someone is on the ground their greatest asset is lost, their ability to be mobile and movement is taken away from them, so people panic, and BJJ teaches you to react with great effectiveness there. Even people that train in BJJ a little bit show great effectiveness when there on the ground with someone because of the limitation of movement. So it's two factors working for them on the gorund, no mobility and familiarity, against someone not trained on the ground. Stand up is much harder to be effective at, as people will always have the option of running away, backpeddling, and it's much hard to control someone's action when they are standing, they just have more ability to counter react and re position themselves while standing, since their easy of movement is still there.

James

anerlich
03-17-2010, 02:03 PM
former JKD guys like matt thornton, paul sharp etc all advocate sparring, and even vunaks crew(the street fighting HKE's guys) spar, and all those top guys with him have aleast a bjj purple belt so we can see how they feel about so called alive sparring and grappling

Also, it's a bit disingenuous to set JKD up against BJJ when you have Dan Inosanto as a BJJ black belt.

Most of the better BJJ guys lapped up all the BJJ they could get as soon as they could.

It's arguable MMA is similar to JKD.

Wayfaring
03-17-2010, 05:30 PM
Can you make what you do work in this?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvN1dQPFRK8

I doubt it. I'd be more likely to cover up and evade for 1:00 and clock them right after the buzzer. Or when their mouth started hanging open and their hands dropped. OK, that might be at 40 sec.

Wayfaring
03-17-2010, 05:32 PM
actually to be fair he said his wing chun has loads of tools...
Actually I would agree that his wing chun has loads of tools. Although I'd never talk about my classmates that way. :D

Wayfaring
03-17-2010, 05:34 PM
haha Looks like the first round of any Toughman contest i've ever been to.

And the second round looks more like a couple of guys with their tongues hanging out and their hands on their knees.

Frost
03-18-2010, 03:08 AM
I think one of the misconceptions of Wing Chun is that it is a style. I've been thru some reeducation over the last few years, and today my view is that Wing Chun is unique in the Martial Arts, in that it is not a style at all, it doesn't tell you what to do vs this or that attack, how to hold your hands, or stand this way or that. It has a general strategy and idea of attack, but other than that, it is free to be used in anyway shape or form. Of course if you are familiar with the system, you would recognize it in action, but it would be hard to do so. The problem with most WC out there is #1 the practitioners, they are TRYING to display or be the style when they fight. I've seen so many video's and live demos of it that you can see the unnaturalness of their actions coming out, as can be seen from a vid like this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-PTi3SptEI, I'm not saying everyone in WC is like this but I see it alot.

The question I ask, if you look at the curriculum, how does one take what you are doing in class, chi sau, laap sau, dummy and such, as application, you can't but you can take the skills you learn, the ideas and body mechanics/structures learned and apply them easy. It's like a training regimend to get strong/fit in the gym, so you can perform better in life, maintain health and prevent injury, or like using a sharpening tool to sharpen your axe or saw, it's something that helps your natural action in combat become better, more efficient and effective, that's it. So in essence I don't believe a failure or success of someone training in WC in sparring or combat is an indication of the effectiveness of the system, rather it's an inidication of the individuals effectiveness, because true effectiveness in combat is subjective. Two factors play a role, your own skills and your opponents skills and both's persons ability to utilize them when they need to. Against some I will be easily able to handle their pressure and utilize my tools, against others it won't happen as easy, that's a fact for each of us here. Basically the way WC is taught generally is incorrect. I've seen lots, experienced lots of WC outside of my lineage, trained two lineages myself, and besides my own lineage there are a few others that teach it well, but not many. #2 problem is the teachers or leaders of these lineages are more about selling membership and keeping the sheep in line, than teaching what the system teaches and how it works, IMO of course.

BJJ works very well, for a couple of basic reasons, one it's sophisticated and well thought out, two once someone is on the ground their greatest asset is lost, their ability to be mobile and movement is taken away from them, so people panic, and BJJ teaches you to react with great effectiveness there. Even people that train in BJJ a little bit show great effectiveness when there on the ground with someone because of the limitation of movement. So it's two factors working for them on the gorund, no mobility and familiarity, against someone not trained on the ground. Stand up is much harder to be effective at, as people will always have the option of running away, backpeddling, and it's much hard to control someone's action when they are standing, they just have more ability to counter react and re position themselves while standing, since their easy of movement is still there.

James


But if it helps your natural reactions in combat become better then surely people should be winning fights with it, even if it does not look like wing chun then people should still be seen to be winning that have a wing chun back ground, in MMA sanshu etc wouldn't you agree?

And I have a hard time understanding how a style that is meant to be all about making you more efficient and effective in combat doesn't teach you the principles/strategies you talk about by using actual techniques you might use in a fight..... it seems pretty inefficient to me to teach those principles, body mechanics etc using structures that you would not use in a fight and then have the student figure out how to use them in their natural way of fighting. BJJ is principle based as well but it teaches those principles through techniques and positions/postures you actually use in a fight, surely that is more efficient?

You are correct in that it’s you and your opponent in a fight but the skills you both bring are developed through your martial arts training, and if one system keeps helping produce fighters and the drills they use are readily applicable and recognisable in a fight and another style has trouble producing fighters in any format then surely there is something wrong? And I know not all people want to compete or get caught on camera fighting but wing chun is meant to be the most popular Chinese system out there, so how come so few actually fight and when they do apart from a few guys they look bad or lose?

sanjuro_ronin
03-18-2010, 06:02 AM
RE: WC not being a style.
Here is the thing, regardless of what WC was or should be, a style is what IT IS.
The moment you add a curriculm and forms that are :set in stone", you create an orthodox system, a style.
If WC was just a collection of principles and concepts then anything could be WC, it would be a generic name like what BL wanted for JKD.
I am sure that was probably the intent of BL when he created JKD, to get back what he may have precieved that WC "lost".
His teacher WSL was adamant that WC was all about the concepts and principles, he even argued how some would say that him wining a fight with a knee strike is not WC because there are no knee strikes in WC.
But the issue is that, the movement toy make a set series of forms and techniques and say "this is WC', then you have made it WC and made WC a style.

sihing
03-18-2010, 09:11 AM
There are definetly techniques in Wing Chun, like I said in my post, someone familiar with the system would see the application of them in a fight. But I don't like the idea of teaching techniques, or that there are specific ways to defend this or that attack. Once in awhile we do drills where the partner will throw attack from a non contacted position, but this is about learning the timing of the entry, but I do show the students you can do this or that when the attack is coming at you so they can function in the drill, all of it is about hitting off the attack, and if you can't avoid it as best as possible.

The whole idea of the WC I'm learning is to shut down the other guys ability to attack, that is why we fight inclose, so if I am in the position of having to defend a whole bunch of attacks then right there I am not using the skills WC is teaching me. This is very subtle, if you are lets say 4 or 6" too far back in range everything changes, the range is too far away, the tools will not work for you very well. Of course we can function here, it is just that it will be that much harder to achieve success. So for me, I really look at WC as a method of training my body to function in that close. For e.g. part of the SNT training is to perfect your accuracy and aim. When in YJKYMA, all of the shapes we perform in SNT are done relatively down our centerline, here I am learning to aim the weapons, whether it's tan, fok, wu, biu, etc, in a direction basically right in front of me. It's like learning to shot a stationary target with a gun or bow, while I myself am stationary as well. Perfecting aim and other things of course. This translates when you learn Chum Kiu, now you are moving your horse, your center and the shapes have to follow correctly, but they are not following by moving the arms or shoulders, they move because my center facing/torso is moving, I'm also combining this with my lower body movement.

Chi sau brings it all alive with a real partner, you learn to chase a moving and reacting opponent, maintaining the facing and aim of your tools, using the legs as the power source, and continually launching attacks, one hand helping the other and alternating, while eating their space and attacking COG. So you can't IMO learn this by having someone attack you with a punch or shot over and over again, we need a prolonged contact drill, cooperative in the beginning, not so later on. It's unrealistic for application but great for tool development. This continues with Laap sau drill, which is a bit more realistic in apllication because now you are incontact with only one hand against his two hands and alternating. You learn the bong/laap sequence, how to enter and we can also spar here while staying within the limited WC frame and box. After all of this is done, there is of course the dummy work to refine our positions and angles, fix our mistakes, long pole to further strengthen our structure and moving frame. Not familiar with the Blades so I won't go there, lol.

After all this you can free spar with it, here you learn to apply the tools, without thought about them, you are not TRYING to bring about a tan, biu, and particular footwork pattern, nothing like that, you just spar, finding out what is working and what isn't, to me this isn't WC as now it is the individual doing their thing. In the class everyone is doing the samething, exactly the same, building it up from the ground up like a building. In sparring the individuality comes out, not everyone moves the same way, but the core is still there, and it can be seen.

Now why I haven't seen fighters training in WC, is probably because it really isn't meant for the ring (not because of deadlyness, rather it would be easy to counter once seen), because it takes a long time to learn, it's very precise and subtle so much so that most fighters will not take the time to learn it. But I myself have met up with people from other styles and it worked just fine, same with my students and fellow training partners. All of us combined have applied it against karate, MT, wrestlers and the such, it all worked fine, so this is proof enough for me, not that I need any, if there wasn't any proof I would still practice and teach the system, as I do it mostly for enjoyment.

Style or system, I guess it's all semantics, and it depends on how you define each term. For me a style is something that is not only changing how you move in a fight, it is telling you what to do in a mechanical preconceived way, he does this you do that. It's too fixed IMO, that's why most styles don't work in application. I can't tell you how many times I've met people from different styles and they just can't use there stuff when it comes time to use it, even when feeding them easy attacks it just doesn't come out natural. Systems are tool developers, WC is not the only system out there, but I like the idea of it developing what I already have but not limiting me on how I use it, more natural expression in my opinion. Bruce said one has to be "Unnaturally Natural, or Naturally Unnatural", moving naturally within a learned framework.

James

sanjuro_ronin
03-18-2010, 09:49 AM
Long post James, but I agree with what you say and do like that quote from BL.

If there was one thing I took from boxing is that there is no need to block and where you can block, you can strike, so why bother blocking?
( Of course blocking has its merits and doing it well can work really well for you, but that isn't an issue right now).
WC should be the embodiment of simple, direct and effective.
Why block when you can hit?
Why parry when you can evade?
Why stick or trap when you can hit?
The strike is the answer to all the questions presented to a WC fighter.
An ex:
I used this example that I picked up from BL, to show simple, direct and effective -

Someone grabs your left wrist:
There are a MILLION counters to this, from a counter writ lock whilel stepping back, to a counter while stepping in, from a barrage of moves to a combination of strikes and locks, whatever.
the WC view?
Punch him in the face - simple, direct and effective.
Nothing releases a hold like getting your face smashed.

sihing
03-18-2010, 10:06 AM
Yeah, I get long winded:)

True post Paul, good points brought up. Simply put WC is core set of skills & body mechanics, allowing one to function with the priniples you said Simple, Direct, Efficient, how you apply them is up to you.

JR

Wayfaring
03-18-2010, 03:57 PM
Chi sau brings it all alive with a real partner, you learn to chase a moving and reacting opponent, maintaining the facing and aim of your tools, using the legs as the power source, and continually launching attacks, one hand helping the other and alternating, while eating their space and attacking COG. So you can't IMO learn this by having someone attack you with a punch or shot over and over again, we need a prolonged contact drill, cooperative in the beginning, not so later on. It's unrealistic for application but great for tool development. This continues with Laap sau drill, which is a bit more realistic in apllication because now you are incontact with only one hand against his two hands and alternating. You learn the bong/laap sequence, how to enter and we can also spar here while staying within the limited WC frame and box. After all of this is done, there is of course the dummy work to refine our positions and angles, fix our mistakes, long pole to further strengthen our structure and moving frame. Not familiar with the Blades so I won't go there, lol.
...
James

Picking out one thing to discuss here.

More recently my view of chi sau is that the biggest problem with it is that it does not train closing the gap. 2 people walk up to bridge contact range and practice from there.

There are tenets like "if there is no bridge strike", but that does not cover or practice the skillsets to do so. A simple boxer who trains mitts with a circling jab has a greater skillset to actually accomplish "if there is no bridge strike".

The greatest weakness practicing chi sau in the traditional fashion produces is that against a boxer or striker with footwork who can hover around and move at the edge of striking range. There is quite a variety of things you can do from there that will nullify the bridge range if people don't practice live at that range.

Pacman
03-18-2010, 04:35 PM
I understand what James is saying.

Some people are having issues with the statement, "WC is not a style".

I think he is saying that WC is not a precisely defined style that dictates how exactly how to hold your hands, how exactly to stand etc.

the curriculum is teaching certain principles and ideas as opposed to a set of choreographed fight scenes (think karate kata, tkd, or choy li fut forms)

if you look at practitioners of karate, MT, they are generally going to be fighting in the same stance, holding their hands the same way, etc. their curriculum is very defined. It can be taught much more easily than WC.

The downside to the lack of definition in WC is that it can easily be misunderstood.

For example, we practice in the pigeon toed stance in training, but some people take this concept and think that is how you fight. They think if you fight with WC you must stand like a potted plant in the pigeon toed stance and walk around like an idiot.

Most likely these people are the ones who have learned other styles where their forms or kata are choreographed fight scenes, so they think that all WC training is a choreographed representation of how they should fight.

there are many more examples, but i think this is what james means

Pacman
03-18-2010, 04:37 PM
i think you hit the nail on the head. the biggest problem with chi sau is that people do not train how to get into that position to apply it.

just practicing chi sau is like hitting the punching bag all day. you might have a monster punch, but you dont have the other skills to make use of it


Picking out one thing to discuss here.

More recently my view of chi sau is that the biggest problem with it is that it does not train closing the gap. 2 people walk up to bridge contact range and practice from there.

sihing
03-18-2010, 05:41 PM
I understand what James is saying.

Some people are having issues with the statement, "WC is not a style".

I think he is saying that WC is not a precisely defined style that dictates how exactly how to hold your hands, how exactly to stand etc.

the curriculum is teaching certain principles and ideas as opposed to a set of choreographed fight scenes (think karate kata, tkd, or choy li fut forms)

if you look at practitioners of karate, MT, they are generally going to be fighting in the same stance, holding their hands the same way, etc. their curriculum is very defined. It can be taught much more easily than WC.

The downside to the lack of definition in WC is that it can easily be misunderstood.

For example, we practice in the pigeon toed stance in training, but some people take this concept and think that is how you fight. They think if you fight with WC you must stand like a potted plant in the pigeon toed stance and walk around like an idiot.

Most likely these people are the ones who have learned other styles where their forms or kata are choreographed fight scenes, so they think that all WC training is a choreographed representation of how they should fight.

there are many more examples, but i think this is what james means

Those are good points and another way to put it. Misunderstanding is prevelant in the system, probably because it is concept based and concepts can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Alot of this also has to do with the teachers of the past, and Yip Man as well, he wasn't known as a great teacher, and from what I understand there wasn't much verbal communication of the concepts/principles of the system, you watched the seniors or Yip himself (he maybe showed you once or twice) then trained it and figured it out yourself. Luckily WSL, as well as a few others, didn't teach this way, they explained more and cared more deeply about the students they had.

When I was in TWC we were told exactly that about the YJKYMA in the "modified" version of WC, how do you fight in a stance like that. Now I know what it means and what it represents, it all depends on who you learned it from and what you do with that information.

James

sihing
03-18-2010, 05:45 PM
i think you hit the nail on the head. the biggest problem with chi sau is that people do not train how to get into that position to apply it.

just practicing chi sau is like hitting the punching bag all day. you might have a monster punch, but you dont have the other skills to make use of it

I look at chi sau and all the other drills as isolation excersises. There's a unrealistic prolonged contact in the drills, that is in place to teach us a whole bunch of things. How to bridge can be added to the drills easy, since there is prolonged contact all one partner has to do is release contact and retreat, the other guy has to close the gap anyway they can and as quickly as they can to keep that gap tight. I would even venture to teach the TWC entry technique as a way to bridge the gap as I believe it has it's place and time,but generally quick adjusting shuffle steps forward is the key thing. Also is the idea of letting the other guy close the gap for you, in this case we are the counter fighters and have to respond from there.

James

YungChun
03-19-2010, 12:55 AM
i think you hit the nail on the head. the biggest problem with chi sau is that people do not train how to get into that position to apply it.


ChiSao trains so many things and skills.. Despite what some folks say it takes a long time to develop decent ChiSao as evidenced by all the crap ChiSao we see.

But ChiSao was never intended to be the end of the training anymore than was the PakSao drill. If it was I could see the concern, but it isn't..

HumbleWCGuy
03-19-2010, 01:12 AM
i like some of what i saw, some i didn't but as you say they are sparring and thats a good thing

former JKD guys like matt thornton, paul sharp etc all advocate sparring, and even vunaks crew(the street fighting HKE's guys) spar, and all those top guys with him have aleast a bjj purple belt so we can see how they feel about so called alive sparring and grappling

I am inclined to agree with the comments on the video which suggest that Tim Tackett is a complete hack. If you want to talk JKD terminology and listen to Bruce Lee quotes about fighting, he is your guy.

m1k3
03-19-2010, 06:33 AM
I doubt it. I'd be more likely to cover up and evade for 1:00 and clock them right after the buzzer. Or when their mouth started hanging open and their hands dropped. OK, that might be at 40 sec.

Actually you wouldn't. This is a military exercise to train aggression and overcoming fatigue. If you did cover during your match you would probably end up doing pushups until you were ready to puke and then sent back into the ring to try again and again and again until the point of the exercise became clear. We had similar training in the US Marines but ours involved pugil sticks.

stonecrusher69
03-19-2010, 08:22 AM
perhaps I am aging....

IMHO, this is not effective, too much struggle...

Do anyone like to share how to finish this in a much shorter time and less moves?


Yeah, don't get involved in the first place..that's the shortest of all moves

Pacman
03-19-2010, 11:37 AM
another problem with the loose definition is that people can try to call anything wing chun.

someone might have one concept in mind, lets say for example "to hit and control" and they will call what they do wing chun. i guess its subjective--if you do 1% wing chun can you call what you do wing chun? IMO no, but others may say yes


Those are good points and another way to put it. Misunderstanding is prevelant in the system, probably because it is concept based and concepts can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Alot of this also has to do with the teachers of the past, and Yip Man as well, he wasn't known as a great teacher, and from what I understand there wasn't much verbal communication of the concepts/principles of the system, you watched the seniors or Yip himself (he maybe showed you once or twice) then trained it and figured it out yourself. Luckily WSL, as well as a few others, didn't teach this way, they explained more and cared more deeply about the students they had.

When I was in TWC we were told exactly that about the YJKYMA in the "modified" version of WC, how do you fight in a stance like that. Now I know what it means and what it represents, it all depends on who you learned it from and what you do with that information.

James

sihing
03-19-2010, 12:23 PM
another problem with the loose definition is that people can try to call anything wing chun.

someone might have one concept in mind, lets say for example "to hit and control" and they will call what they do wing chun. i guess its subjective--if you do 1% wing chun can you call what you do wing chun? IMO no, but others may say yes

The goal in combat is to defeat your opponent right? So for me it would not be about how I did it, or did I use WING CHUN in the process, rather it's about me walking away as uninjured as possible, and the opponent defeated, that's it. If that means me taking him down for some GnP fine, or just straight stand up KO'g fine, or even making him quit, fine, doesn't matter how it's done as long as it is done. Maybe latter on you can look back at what you did and analyse it, if you can remember what you did that is?

WC is the training, the acquistion of some tools and strategy, when you try to use it on purpose in combat, like consiously trying to use a tan or bong or chain punch, then you make it mechanical. Be natural with it, hit the guy with whatever is available, elbow, forearm, side palm, shoulder, knee, whatever, hopefully and I believe it to be so, the training (depending on how you train and what you train in WC) will have helped you do it more simply, directly and efficiently.

James

Pacman
03-19-2010, 04:31 PM
im not saying what you should or should not do in combat. i agree that whatever you do should come naturally and hopefully your training focuses on that ability, but what i am saying is that you can't do whatever in a fight and call it wing chun.

WC is a loosely defined style, but there is some definition.


The goal in combat is to defeat your opponent right? So for me it would not be about how I did it, or did I use WING CHUN in the process, rather it's about me walking away as uninjured as possible, and the opponent defeated, that's it. If that means me taking him down for some GnP fine, or just straight stand up KO'g fine, or even making him quit, fine, doesn't matter how it's done as long as it is done. Maybe latter on you can look back at what you did and analyse it, if you can remember what you did that is?

WC is the training, the acquistion of some tools and strategy, when you try to use it on purpose in combat, like consiously trying to use a tan or bong or chain punch, then you make it mechanical. Be natural with it, hit the guy with whatever is available, elbow, forearm, side palm, shoulder, knee, whatever, hopefully and I believe it to be so, the training (depending on how you train and what you train in WC) will have helped you do it more simply, directly and efficiently.

James

Wayfaring
03-19-2010, 11:11 PM
Actually you wouldn't. This is a military exercise to train aggression and overcoming fatigue. If you did cover during your match you would probably end up doing pushups until you were ready to puke and then sent back into the ring to try again and again and again until the point of the exercise became clear. We had similar training in the US Marines but ours involved pugil sticks.

I was talking about realistically dealing with it, not doing some stupid exercise. I'm sure I could do the d@mn exercise.

Wayfaring
03-19-2010, 11:15 PM
The goal in combat is to defeat your opponent right?
One thing that's kind of hilarious is how WCK people always talk about "combat". Come on. It's not combat. Combat is Afghanistan, sand, and M16s. Open hand confrontations are a fight. I think it goes hand in hand with overanalyzing and theory.

m1k3
03-20-2010, 04:50 AM
One thing that's kind of hilarious is how WCK people always talk about "combat". Come on. It's not combat. Combat is Afghanistan, sand, and M16s. Open hand confrontations are a fight. I think it goes hand in hand with overanalyzing and theory.

I agree 100% with your combat statement. As for the exercise I'm sure you could do it also, I was just pointing out when you are going through the training you don't have an option on doing it or not doing it.

I also agree with what SJ was saying about WCK being as simple as "punch him in the face". WCK should be simple and direct. I think a lot of stuff gets added to an art as it moves into becoming a business instead of a way of fighting. As much as a lot of people here seem to dislike combative sports, the competition does keep some sort of fighting as the primary focus of the art.