Is Victor putting on a good demonstration of WC? [Archive]

shawchemical

04-21-2010, 08:51 PM

Pretty poor IMHO.

There's no sign of simultaneous redirection and attack. Standing in front of someone waving your arms around is hardly a good application of any technique in any system.

There's no attempt to interrupt the attacker and counter, and seemingly no attempt to take the initiative. This appears to result in his head remaining in range of the longer man's jab the whole time. Every single strike the dreadlocked guy threw left himself open and incredibly vulnerable, and yet there was no desire to go forward through the man and punish him for his mistake.

There's no forward intent, and ultimately no ving tsun here.

Ultimatewingchun

04-21-2010, 08:54 PM

The block of his punch in the last vid - which lead to the takedown...was a bil/lop...with punches to follow - and then the takedown.

Thanks for posting that, Dale...I forgot about that.

Knifefighter

04-21-2010, 08:59 PM

The block of his punch in the last vid - which lead to the takedown...was a bil/lop...with punches to follow - and then the takedown.

What about the "raised arm" techniques in the first clip at 11-12 seconds & 18-19 seconds? What WC techniques are those? I don't remember learning those. But of course, I didn't learn the "real" WC. Since I'm so clueless, maybe you can fill me in on what those are because I was never taught those.

Ultimatewingchun

04-21-2010, 09:02 PM

What about the "raised arm" techniques in the first clip at 11-12 seconds & 18-19 seconds? What WC techniques are those?

Bil sao by itself (both times)...no lop to follow (no opportunity for lop because I wasn't going forward).

goju

04-21-2010, 09:03 PM

shawchemical

04-21-2010, 09:07 PM

pattycake the entire lot of it.

Nothing more.

TAKEDOWN?? rubbish, falling over is not a takedown! You just got very very lucky that when you got tripped over as the man was falling, that you reacted faster.

Phil Redmond

04-21-2010, 09:19 PM

What about the "raised arm" techniques in the first clip at 11-12 seconds & 18-19 seconds? What WC techniques are those? I don't remember learning those. But of course, I didn't learn the "real" WC. Since I'm so clueless, maybe you can fill me in on what those are because I was never taught those.
After watching the first clip in slow motion I saw a biu/pak at 11-12. We do use a biu/bil sao like that in TWC. You can see it used here with a kick:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyQH4M550M0

Ultimatewingchun

04-21-2010, 09:22 PM

shawchemical

04-21-2010, 09:27 PM

Not exactly the best single leg I've ever attempted, but that is what brought about the takedown. He lost his balance because I took his leg, lifted it, and pressured forward - and also made possible because the punches were backing him up and putting him on his heels.

Admittedly, since I wasn't driving into him with the proper penetration you'd want to see (or a transition to a double leg)...I lost my balance also; but as you said, being faster, I recovered before he had a chance to counter.

My point is that you should never have gone down in that circumstance, and the only reason you did was due to poor positioning of your feet and waist. Yeah you had him in a very vulnerable position, but you did nothing to capitalise on it. Just like the entire video set.

Phil Redmond

04-21-2010, 09:28 PM

You can also see a biu sao at 5-6 in this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aolIZIFX-pg&feature=related
I have so many more but it's late.

shawchemical

04-21-2010, 09:31 PM

You can also see a biu sao at 5-6 in this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aolIZIFX-pg&feature=related
I have so many more but it's late.

What is that video meant to show but ineffective pattycake?? You can't KO someone by slapping them on the elbow!

HumbleWCGuy

04-21-2010, 09:33 PM

Vic, was pretty content to stay patient. There just wasn't a lot there for me to really judge.

Two points:
1. no one has to apologize for winning a sparring match.
2. The problem with anyone who knows WC and other stuff is that they might just want to do other stuff for paticular matches or training. Unless Vic were to say, "Hey, look at me doing all of this awesome WC," it is hard to criticize his WC. In any event, it was a slow-paced match with not much in it.

Ultimatewingchun

04-21-2010, 09:34 PM

Well...I guess it is time for you to show us something on vid, now isn't it?

What do ya' got, shaw...???

Anything?

Good or bad, show us something !!!

Ultimatewingchun

04-21-2010, 09:52 PM

Watch carefully the first 5 seconds of the 2nd vid again. In response to his attacking punches, I did: bil, pak, pak, bong, gum...(the gum/pining hand was to the back of his left elbow)...

and then the wu sao accompanying the bong became a palm strike to his face with my left hand.

(And yes, if you really look carefully, you can see that the wu sao actually started to lop before he withdrew his left arm - opening up the path for the wu/lop to immediately become the palm strike).

And right on the money, actually. But when you've got thin, semi-fingerless gloves on and throw a palm towards a cage of metal bars: ouch! :eek:

But that's alright. They were actually the best examples of purely wing chun combos used on all three vids, imo.

Btw...I've observed that if you watch those first 5 seconds with the sound off (eliminating any noise distractions)...you notice the moves I'm talking about more distinctly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=win-6R7_JrM

bennyvt

04-22-2010, 03:23 AM

dude. Someone says you don't know vt so you show a video trying to get others to back you up. Nice trolling but not taking the bait.

t_niehoff

04-22-2010, 03:57 AM

In your opinion, is this a good representation of how WC is applied in a full-contact situation?
If you saw someone sparring like this, what would be your opinion of his knowledge of WC? Which, if either of them is performing good WC techniques?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ftHkJClhQ0

I have difficulty calling that full-contact sparring. Why are they wearing all the protective gear when both guys are using much less than full power? Moreover, you can tell that Victor's partner isn't even genuinely fighting back in some instances. And why does the fighting stop and restart? That is play fighting.

But, you do see ALL kinds of outside fighting bad habits, including reaching for punches, little-to-no head movement, off-balance punching, etc. A good boxer (or good fighter) would chew these guys up. If they are going to box, they should go train at a good boxing gym and learn how.

All the "I saw a bil sao!" aside, this is precisely what I mean by "WCK kickboxing" -- kickboxing and tossing in every now and then a WCK movement. Is this what you train to do? Is this WCK's approach to fighting? Do you even need to learn and practice WCK to do THAT? Of course not. You'd be better off just going to a good kickboxing gym and learning how to kickbox well.

taai gihk yahn

04-22-2010, 04:10 AM

Frost

04-22-2010, 05:02 AM

Not exactly the best single leg I've ever attempted, but that is what brought about the takedown. He lost his balance because I took his leg, lifted it, and pressured forward - and also made possible because the punches were backing him up and putting him on his heels.

Admittedly, since I wasn't driving into him with the proper penetration you'd want to see (or a transition to a double leg)...I lost my balance also; but as you said, being faster, I recovered before he had a chance to counter.

im sorry but you fell over that was not a single leg takedown it was a slip and fall

t_niehoff

04-22-2010, 05:04 AM

im sorry but you fell over that was not a single leg takedown it was a slip and fall

But splendid technique in slipping and falling nonetheless. ;)

Frost

04-22-2010, 05:04 AM

ummm - looked like pretty standard light to medium stand-up Sparring™ with some low-intensity clinch / ground work;

if u want to call it WC, hey, whatever; just further indication that when u actively spar, u stop "looking" like a given style and more like the consequence of what entails "natural" human movement in a given context;

nicely put, why all that gear when they are going light is beyond me, those body protectors and head gear make grappling all but impossible you would be better off wearing boxing gloves and doing away with that stuff

Frost

04-22-2010, 05:06 AM

But splendid technique in slipping and falling nonetheless. ;)

LMAO true, and the ground stuff was...well i find it hard to put it into words

HumbleWCGuy

04-22-2010, 05:11 AM

I have difficulty calling that full-contact sparring. Why are they wearing all the protective gear when both guys are using much less than full power? Moreover, you can tell that Victor's partner isn't even genuinely fighting back in some instances. And why does the fighting stop and restart? That is play fighting.

But, you do see ALL kinds of outside fighting bad habits, including reaching for punches, little-to-no head movement, off-balance punching, etc. A good boxer (or good fighter) would chew these guys up. If they are going to box, they should go train at a good boxing gym and learn how.

All the "I saw a bil sao!" aside, this is precisely what I mean by "WCK kickboxing" -- kickboxing and tossing in every now and then a WCK movement. Is this what you train to do? Is this WCK's approach to fighting? Do you even need to learn and practice WCK to do THAT? Of course not. You'd be better off just going to a good kickboxing gym and learning how to kickbox well.
You must really hammer Alan in private then.

t_niehoff

04-22-2010, 05:15 AM

You must really hammer Alan in private then.

LOL! I hammer everyone!

You should look at Alan's DVD to get a good idea of why he does what he does.

LoneTiger108

04-22-2010, 05:25 AM

In your opinion, is this a good representation of how WC is applied in a full-contact situation?
If you saw someone sparring like this, what would be your opinion of his knowledge of WC? Which, if either of them is performing good WC techniques?

From the clips I get the general feeling that the idea that both players have studied or drilled any Wing Chun is highly unlikely.

I suggests dropping all the other training and just drill some decent Wing Chun for 6 months and then post another clip! :D

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 05:25 AM

It was fine.
It was medium contact at best, didn't look like anyone was trying to KO the other person, just hit hard enough to keep it honest.
As the fight progressed, Vic seemed to be more comfortable, though he hurt his hand on the face mask.
The single leg was an attempted take down that worked cause they fell, but nothing to be proud of as Vic admits.
He got the mount and controlled it from there.
This is what WC typically looks like when fought "free style" and VS a bigger opponent.
Is it a good demo?
Well, it was a sparring match and not a demo, so no, not a good demo, but a fair representation of Vic's WC in a contact environment with gear.

LoneTiger108

04-22-2010, 05:30 AM

This is what WC typically looks like when fought "free style" and VS a bigger opponent.

:eek:

I really, really hope you are joking! :o

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 05:40 AM

:eek:

I really, really hope you are joking! :o

Please show us a clip of a smaller WC guy fighting a bigger one that looks different.

LoneTiger108

04-22-2010, 05:51 AM

Please show us a clip of a smaller WC guy fighting a bigger one that looks different.

Here's a little problem.

Not many clips online that reflect what you want to see! :mad:

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 05:56 AM

Here's a little problem.

Not many clips online that reflect what you want to see! :mad:

Actually, there are a lot, they just don't look like WCm why?
Because WC only LOOKS like WC when done VS WC and when demoed.
Add size difference and contact and its a whole different ball game.
Sure the principles may still be there, but the distinctive look you see in static and dead demos will be gone and with good reason.

LoneTiger108

04-22-2010, 06:10 AM

Actually, there are a lot, they just don't look like WCm why?
Because WC only LOOKS like WC when done VS WC and when demoed.
Add size difference and contact and its a whole different ball game.
Sure the principles may still be there, but the distinctive look you see in static and dead demos will be gone and with good reason.

I have to disagree :( (except for the static demo comment. Point taken!)

You too have obviously left the field for pastures new!? Maybe without enough training/drilling/understanding in Wing Chun?

I'm not having a go here, just being honest. I'm a small guy myself, and I would try to not let my WC collapse under pressure from anyone. No matter how big/strong/mentally unstable! :D

The Wing Chun I know has always served me well in such situations, maybe even more so that it would a big guy who relies on his brute strength...

Frost

04-22-2010, 06:12 AM

I have to disagree :( (except for the static demo comment. Point taken!)

You too have obviously left the field for pastures new!? Maybe without enough training/drilling/understanding in Wing Chun?

I'm not having a go here, just being honest. I'm a small guy myself, and I would try to not let my WC collapse under pressure from anyone. No matter how big/strong/mentally unstable! :D

The Wing Chun I know has always served me well in such situations, maybe even more so that it would a big guy who relies on his brute strength...

in that case since it serves you well and you agree there are no clips showing what ronin wants to see how about taking a clip of yourself sparring and showing us how it should be done? this is genuine as i am interested to see how wing chun should look when under pressure because at the moment no one can actually point a clip of this out to us, perhaps you can help?

t_niehoff

04-22-2010, 06:58 AM

in that case since it serves you well and you agree there are no clips showing what ronin wants to see how about taking a clip of yourself sparring and showing us how it should be done? this is genuine as i am interested to see how wing chun should look when under pressure because at the moment no one can actually point a clip of this out to us, perhaps you can help?

Alan and his guys are a good example of WCK. Alan and his guys know the method, have the WCK body structure, etc. It's all there. The only difference between what Alan does and what I do (we both have the same sifu) is our focus -- sort of like the difference between a floating top game and a tight, crushing top game in BJJ. It's still BJJ. And what Alan and I do is WCK.

The problem is that it takes discernment to see it. That discernment comes from fighting with skilled people with your WCK.

But let me be frank, i.e., rant. I understand that you -- and many others -- want to "see" how it is done. My POV is that no one showed me how it was done, I had to work, and work very hard to find out how to make my WCK work. I searched for someone (finally finding Robert) that could fill in the gaps in my WCK education (like many I was missing key fundamentals like the faat, the body structure,etc.), I had to travel across the country numerous times to learn/train, I had to pay a fair amount of money (worth every penny), I had to put in hundreds of hours of training and/or sparring at MT and MMA schools, etc, to learn "how it is done". In other words, I had to work and EARN at great personal cost (my time is fairly valuable, and I've gotten some significant injuries including a broken leg, detached retina, etc.) and at substantial financial cost, how to make my WCK work. So, forgive me if I think that if someone REALLY wants to "see how it is done" then they need to make a f#cking effort to learn. They need to do what I did. And if they aren't willing to do that, then IMO they shouldn't get it.

LSWCTN1

04-22-2010, 07:05 AM

Alan and his guys are a good example of WCK. Alan and his guys know the method, have the WCK body structure, etc. It's all there. The only difference between what Alan does and what I do (we both have the same sifu) is our focus -- sort of like the difference between a floating top game and a tight, crushing top game in BJJ. It's still BJJ. And what Alan and I do is WCK.

The problem is that it takes discernment to see it. That discernment comes from fighting with skilled people with your WCK.

But let me be frank, i.e., rant. I understand that you -- and many others -- want to "see" how it is done. My POV is that no one showed me how it was done, I had to work, and work very hard to find out how to make my WCK work. I searched for someone (finally finding Robert) that could fill in the gaps in my WCK education (like many I was missing key fundamentals like the faat, the body structure,etc.), I had to travel across the country numerous times to learn/train, I had to pay a fair amount of money (worth every penny), I had to put in hundreds of hours of training and/or sparring at MT and MMA schools, etc, to learn "how it is done". In other words, I had to work and EARN at great personal cost (my time is fairly valuable, and I've gotten some significant injuries including a broken leg, detached retina, etc.) and at substantial financial cost, how to make my WCK work. So, forgive me if I think that if someone REALLY wants to "see how it is done" then they need to make a f#cking effort to learn. They need to do what I did. And if they aren't willing to do that, then IMO they shouldn't get it.

i think i finally see the motivation behind T and his messages (or message depending on how you look at it :p)

he has spent a long time and a lot of money learning an art that has been a rocky road for him.

he is now pleased with what he has.

seeing cr@ppy wing chun infuriates him (it does me - wck has a very bad name, and not without reason for the most part)

he feels people who dont train hard enough or 'invest' enough are also giving us a bad name.

sorry guys, I'm taking T's side :o

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 07:05 AM

I have to disagree :( (except for the static demo comment. Point taken!)

You too have obviously left the field for pastures new!? Maybe without enough training/drilling/understanding in Wing Chun?

I'm not having a go here, just being honest. I'm a small guy myself, and I would try to not let my WC collapse under pressure from anyone. No matter how big/strong/mentally unstable! :D

The Wing Chun I know has always served me well in such situations, maybe even more so that it would a big guy who relies on his brute strength...

WC and I were NOT a perfect fit, so I took what I need, I freely admit that.
That said, I was well known in Toronto WC circles for making it work, but that is heresay anyways and irrelevant.
Fact is, there is a reason why we don't see WC "looking" like WC in full contact clips and why many WC people debate whether what Alan's guys ( for example) are doing WC or just "kickboxing".

Frost

04-22-2010, 07:10 AM

Alan and his guys are a good example of WCK. Alan and his guys know the method, have the WCK body structure, etc. It's all there. The only difference between what Alan does and what I do (we both have the same sifu) is our focus -- sort of like the difference between a floating top game and a tight, crushing top game in BJJ. It's still BJJ. And what Alan and I do is WCK.

The problem is that it takes discernment to see it. That discernment comes from fighting with skilled people with your WCK.

But let me be frank, i.e., rant. I understand that you -- and many others -- want to "see" how it is done. My POV is that no one showed me how it was done, I had to work, and work very hard to find out how to make my WCK work. I searched for someone (finally finding Robert) that could fill in the gaps in my WCK education (like many I was missing key fundamentals like the faat, the body structure,etc.), I had to travel across the country numerous times to learn/train, I had to pay a fair amount of money (worth every penny), I had to put in hundreds of hours of training and/or sparring at MT and MMA schools, etc, to learn "how it is done". In other words, I had to work and EARN at great personal cost (my time is fairly valuable, and I've gotten some significant injuries including a broken leg, detached retina, etc.) and at substantial financial cost, how to make my WCK work. So, forgive me if I think that if someone REALLY wants to "see how it is done" then they need to make a f#cking effort to learn. They need to do what I did. And if they aren't willing to do that, then IMO they shouldn't get it.

rant away sunshine you are coming from a false premis if its aimed at me...... i wanted to see it because i believe what alan shows is wing chun in action, and since others do not agree i want to see what they think good wing chun is, i know what fighting looks like i know what grappling looks like i now want to see what these people who keep saying all the clips are not wing chun actually consider good wing chun and good fighting

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 07:16 AM

Alan and his guys are a good example of WCK. Alan and his guys know the method, have the WCK body structure, etc. It's all there. The only difference between what Alan does and what I do (we both have the same sifu) is our focus -- sort of like the difference between a floating top game and a tight, crushing top game in BJJ. It's still BJJ. And what Alan and I do is WCK.

The problem is that it takes discernment to see it. That discernment comes from fighting with skilled people with your WCK.

But let me be frank, i.e., rant. I understand that you -- and many others -- want to "see" how it is done. My POV is that no one showed me how it was done, I had to work, and work very hard to find out how to make my WCK work. I searched for someone (finally finding Robert) that could fill in the gaps in my WCK education (like many I was missing key fundamentals like the faat, the body structure,etc.), I had to travel across the country numerous times to learn/train, I had to pay a fair amount of money (worth every penny), I had to put in hundreds of hours of training and/or sparring at MT and MMA schools, etc, to learn "how it is done". In other words, I had to work and EARN at great personal cost (my time is fairly valuable, and I've gotten some significant injuries including a broken leg, detached retina, etc.) and at substantial financial cost, how to make my WCK work. So, forgive me if I think that if someone REALLY wants to "see how it is done" then they need to make a f#cking effort to learn. They need to do what I did. And if they aren't willing to do that, then IMO they shouldn't get it.

What a load of crap.
:p
What the **** makes you think you have done ANYTHING so freaking unique?
Get a grip on reality.
Fact is, someone makes a claim ( WC doesn't look like that) then they should prove that claim and in this day and age, video is the medium.
It has ZERO to do with entitliment and everything to do the old MA adage of "put up or shut up".
I make a claim in Judo or Kyokushin, can some asks for video proof I give it to them.
If that doesn't exist than I SHOW it.
Get off the high horse before some TKD guy kick's you off of it.
:p

taai gihk yahn

04-22-2010, 07:26 AM

Get off the high horse before some TKD guy kick's you off of it.
:p
or at least before some Taiji guy "pats" him...

Ultimatewingchun

04-22-2010, 08:20 AM

What a load of crap.
:p
What the **** makes you think you have done ANYTHING so freaking unique?
Get a grip on reality.
Fact is, someone makes a claim ( WC doesn't look like that) then they should prove that claim and in this day and age, video is the medium.
It has ZERO to do with entitliment and everything to do the old MA adage of "put up or shut up".
I make a claim in Judo or Kyokushin, can some asks for video proof I give it to them.
If that doesn't exist than I SHOW it.
Get off the high horse before some TKD guy kick's you off of it.
:p

***MY GOD, Does anyone now have any doubts about the wisdom I sought in NOT READING Terence Niehoff's posts anymore! The guy is a total poser with a giant hot-5hit attitude. I put him on the IGNORE list about a month ago, so I only read what some of you guys "quote" from his posts.

And even that's too much!!!:eek: :rolleyes: :cool:

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

You've been spot on in your comments on this thread, sanjuro, I must say. And just to reiterate one point you've made, the guy in the vid with me is 6' 3"/210...to my 5'10"/170...and it wasn't a wing chun "demo". The dude is strong and he's got superior reach.

It was far from flawless, and it was only about medium contact - but it's a lot closer to reality fighting than tons of wing chun vids or demos you're going to see.

And done about 5-6 years ago. So we've been working on things (includes a bunch of other guys as well)...to tighten up the quality of what we do and expand the arsenal further.

As for Terence Niehoff, please wing chun forum...don't make me laugh. He's not worth responding to about anything, especially since he, himself, has shown the forum exactly nothing about what he can do.

sanjuro_ronin

04-22-2010, 09:01 AM

Same old crap.
"Wc guys don't do enough contact sparring, where are the videos ?"
Here they are.
"That isn't WC"

Seriously.

Its just as bad and just as good as the usual amateur stuff we always see.
At least it wasn't a static demo or a demo of chi sao, they were actually fighting.

Never expect to see professional quality fighting or sparring from anyone OTHER than PROFESSIONALS !

Phil Redmond

04-22-2010, 11:04 AM

What is that video meant to show but ineffective pattycake?? You can't KO someone by slapping them on the elbow!
That's just too funny. You can't KO someone by slipping a punch either but fighters do it. But in, case you'd like to know the two guys in that clip are fighters who have competed as have many of our students. In fact, we're having some full contact matches July 10 in NYC. Where are you located? Maybe you'd like to compete and show us all how it's done. :)
bwt, there are some fight clips on my youtube channels

Phil Redmond

04-22-2010, 11:12 AM

ummm - looked like pretty standard light to medium stand-up Sparring™ with some low-intensity clinch / ground work;

if u want to call it WC, hey, whatever; just further indication that when u actively spar, u stop "looking" like a given style and more like the consequence of what entails "natural" human movement in a given context;
That is a very good assessment. Use what's natural to you. Who cares what you call it.

Knifefighter

04-22-2010, 11:19 AM

dude. Someone says you don't know vt so you show a video trying to get others to back you up. Nice trolling but not taking the bait.

I'm just trying to get a consensus of what "real" WC is. According to Victor, he's one of the few people who "know" WC. According to him, I don't know what it is... so I'm just trying to see what makes his version "real".

Phil Redmond

04-22-2010, 11:33 AM

goju

04-22-2010, 12:50 PM

What a load of crap.
Get off the high horse before some TKD guy kick's you off of it.
:p

Ill volunteer for that!:D

Ultimatewingchun

04-22-2010, 12:51 PM

Many are called but few are chosen.:D

LoneTiger108

04-22-2010, 03:26 PM

in that case since it serves you well and you agree there are no clips showing what ronin wants to see how about taking a clip of yourself sparring and showing us how it should be done? this is genuine as i am interested to see how wing chun should look when under pressure because at the moment no one can actually point a clip of this out to us, perhaps you can help?

Everyone fights with individual personality, and I just feel that I have yet to see much evidence online that illustrates the personality of wing chun enough. Don't get me wrong, I can see what some are saying when we match techs of wing chun to our gloved fists; seeing the links to other striking arts, and I do see some good examples of sparring (between wing chun students) but when it's a competition between arts instead of exchange and respect, we all lose out in the end!

The question I ask myself is; has my wing chun had enough time to settle into my frame and flow in such a way that it wouldn't be open to ridicule for stretching the common perception of what wing chun is in its fighting form and what it's 'supposed' to look like due to our own experiences of what we've seen and learnt? I can never say that's the way it 'should' be done for everyone, but may be able to express how it works for me. ;)

So, I guess the answer is yes, I can help, but not just by finding good guys to spar with and film sessions but to also be able to plan sessions in such a way that both arts have their time, both arts represent strong understanding.

That's not too easy to accomplish.

anerlich

04-22-2010, 03:45 PM

What a load of crap.

What the **** makes you think you have done ANYTHING so freaking unique?
Get a grip on reality.

Exactly. We all have stories like yours, T, and many of us do the same stuff you do and have done it for longer, though most of us don't feel the need to regale the forum with our "achievements" on a saturation-bombing basis.

You are not a rare and beautiful snowflake.

sort of like the difference between a floating top game and a tight, crushing top game in BJJ. It's still BJJ. And what Alan and I do is WCK.

The tight crushing top game of Haystacks Calhoun would be nothing compared to the titanic crush of the nuthugging on Alan Orr by yourself that we all seem destined to have to put up with. Milk that cow for all it's worth, it's about all you've got.

Just as well you and he live in different countries, otherwise he'd have to have surgery to remove your lips from his a$$.

Ultimatewingchun

04-22-2010, 06:14 PM

Ha! Ha! Ha! :D

You just brought back a very old memory, Andrew...

I was about maybe 12-13 years old, and with my parents and an aunt & uncle on a vacation in New England...I think it may have been the island of Martha's Vineyard off the coast of Massachusetts.

It was a Saturday night and we were in the center of town walking along doing some sight-seeing after dinner...

and we noticed that everyone around us was looking at someone as he walked along the side of the road. Every one in front of us just stopped in their tracks and stared.

IT WAS HAYSTACKS CALHOUN...dressed in a farmers hat and overalls with the suspenders - and walking barefoot.

The gigantic pro wrestler who weighed about 400 lbs. and stood about 6'6"...:eek:

....but alas, Terence Niehoff could never be that captivating. :rolleyes:

As boring as Calhoun was captivating, perhaps...but that's about it !!! :p

YungChun

04-22-2010, 07:08 PM

Here's a clip of the WC we do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzlDFKNoJ2M
btw, we use round punches in our WC.

You know what I like about this, specifically the first guy in the beginning...

I may not always agree 100% with use of technique etc, but that first guy (as an example) has the nuts to do what it takes to do VT.. He takes what comes, holds his ground, lets his hands go and stays with his opponent, often until his opponent is DOWN..

This is IMO a good sized SLICE of what it takes to do VT.. You have to have the ballz to get in there and unleash, something we don't see enough of and something IMO that if you don't have, you will have a hard time doing any VT.

Good for you guys Phil!

SavvySavage

04-22-2010, 08:37 PM

The clips with Victor were pretty good. I liked those. Weren't into the ones put up by Phil Redmond though. No offense to anyone involved. The wing chun was interesting in both but the editing on Phil's vids was distracting and didn't show anyone screwing up.

The sparring I've seen and done has been at a similar level. Wing chunners try to get in close and I've noticed they forsake the longer kicks(round house, etc) to try to get into trapping range. Is this because we're so comfortable there or because we're secretly trying not to look like kickboxers? Who knows.

I believe the term "sparring" is misleading. Martial arts should have "resistance training." Sparring all out is one form of resistance training. Sparring with just kicks vs. just punches, throwing vs, striking, round punches vs straight punches, leg trapping drills, stand up wrestling like in real tai ji, stand up wrestling with punching, are all examples of resistance training. Sparring all out makes it sound like it's the end all be all with nothing inbetween. I believe it's good to have that kind of sparring once in a while but the injuries taken are not worth it. No one is getting paid $100,000 at the end of the match. And there definitely aren't hot almost naked ring girls to look at.

Wayfaring

04-22-2010, 10:39 PM

I'm just trying to get a consensus of what "real" WC is. According to Victor, he's one of the few people who "know" WC. According to him, I don't know what it is... so I'm just trying to see what makes his version "real".

I don't know, man. There is no "real" WC other than that what you make real. And you make it real by exploring working in some contexts like on the video.

Sure it wasn't full out power. But I see plenty of that level and scaling up and down in MMA training. And yes, the clinch, takedowns and ground aren't that great. But they are working at them and going live. If they do that 3x / week they'll build up the skills. But I think there's also a danger with the takedowns, clinch and ground side of it that if there isn't anyone good enough around to make you pay for mistakes, you pick up bad habits. I guess standing too.

Overall I'd rather see people train like that than the standard ways they do train. So I don't have criticism for it.

And I don't think he's trying to put on a good demonstration of WC, but just filmed a more standard sparring session. But you and Victor do have this little dance going on.

HumbleWCGuy

04-22-2010, 10:51 PM

Here's a clip of the WC we do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzlDFKNoJ2M
btw, we use round punches in our WC.

That's more consistent with what I would expect to see out of contemporary WC. Not that Vic's stuf wasn't Okay. He just didn't have much there.

Phil Redmond

04-22-2010, 11:34 PM

Ultimatewingchun

04-22-2010, 11:46 PM

Just came across this vid from the Duncan Leung lineage (Alan Lee's guys here in NYC)...

This is a nice light sparring vid...I like it. I like some of the work they do with a bong/elbow variation to cover and block/deflect, amoungst other things they do here. This overall approach to wing chun (with something of a boxing feel to it)...and the kicking technique...are similar to where we've been going in my school in recent years in some respects.

http://www.youtube.com/user/wingchunnyc?blend=1&ob=4#p/a/f/0/Flkvnk8cPB8

bennyvt

04-23-2010, 01:18 AM

i haven't seen a video of sparing. Watched a few vt guys fight though. But i don't have a problem with alan orr's vt. But they also do bjj and wrestling. I don't have a problem with that. Biu jee head locks are different. The hooks are questionable in the sense of why. Like why get mount when you can beat them in half guard?

LoneTiger108

04-23-2010, 03:49 AM

Just came across this vid from the Duncan Leung lineage (Alan Lee's guys here in NYC)...

http://www.youtube.com/user/wingchunnyc?blend=1&ob=4#p/a/f/0/Flkvnk8cPB8

I actually liked this clip too. Quite a decent structure from one of the guys and a nice flow to his combinations, launching from basic wing chun postures. Some neat legwork and good speed too IMO!

Quite similar to what I could do (given someone to spar with!)

t_niehoff

04-23-2010, 06:57 AM

What a load of crap.
:p
What the **** makes you think you have done ANYTHING so freaking unique?
Get a grip on reality.

I don't think I've done anything unique. I know other people who have EARNED it too. That's my point -- it needs to be EARNED. And some people seem to have a sense of entitlement, that you should just give it to them.

Fact is, someone makes a claim ( WC doesn't look like that) then they should prove that claim and in this day and age, video is the medium.

I don't give a rat's ass about claims -- claims are meaningless. Anyone can claim anything. These things are empty.

The actual question people should be asking themselves is: can I do what I train to do as I train to do it? If someone can do that, who can say they are wrong? Or, as Hawkins put it,"Theory is great but can you do it?"

And, if you are learning to things one way, training to do them another way, then doing it in fighting yet another way, this is a sure sign of a problem.

Look at Victor's clips and ask yourself that question -- is he doing what his TWC teaches you to do, is this what he trains to do? That's the test.

It has ZERO to do with entitliment and everything to do the old MA adage of "put up or shut up".
I make a claim in Judo or Kyokushin, can some asks for video proof I give it to them.
If that doesn't exist than I SHOW it.

So, every time you make some assertion that is questioned are you going to go make a video? ;) Because that is what you are setting yourself up for -- what? won't provide a video, so this time you must be lying.

This is what some of you don't appreciate -- video isn't going to prove it. Alan has videos out, has that convinced people? Look at all the MMA video out there, has that convinced people?

The ONLY thing that will convince people is DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. They need to experience it themselves. You think WCK works on the ground? OK, go to the BJJ school and see. This is why I keep saying, over and over, go to a good MMA school or MT school and see -- see if you can do what YOU train to do.

The problem with THAT is that most people won't give themselves these experiences. But, if you don't, you will never learn.

sanjuro_ronin

04-23-2010, 07:09 AM

So, every time you make some assertion that is questioned are you going to go make a video?

Porn aside, sure why not?
;)

The ONLY thing that will convince people is DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. They need to experience it themselves. You think WCK works on the ground? OK, go to the BJJ school and see. This is why I keep saying, over and over, go to a good MMA school or MT school and see -- see if you can do what YOU train to do.

No one is arguing that point, far from that.
The issue is that, if someone makes a statement - WC has ground fighting, the burden of proof is on them and since this is a internet forum and we live in the video age, then a simpel video should be able to answer that query.
MY personal experience is mine and has nothig to do with someone elses comment.
I have seen nothing decent about WC in terms of ground work, but I also admit I have not seen EVERY one that has ever done WC doing ground work, so I ask, "SHOW ME" and guess what, I am entitiled to ask that of someone that makes a comment that WC does have ground work and it is effective.
It then falls on the comment maker to PROVE his point.

Knifefighter

04-23-2010, 07:36 AM

Porn aside, sure why not?
;)

No one is arguing that point, far from that.
The issue is that, if someone makes a statement - WC has ground fighting, the burden of proof is on them and since this is a internet forum and we live in the video age, then a simpel video should be able to answer that query.

I agree. These days, it's easy to make a vid and post it. If you are going to make an assertion, there should be some type of evidence to back it up. Doesn't necessarily have to be one's own clip (unless the assertion is that you can do it yourself), but something to provide evidence.

t_niehoff

04-23-2010, 07:37 AM

No one is arguing that point, far from that.
The issue is that, if someone makes a statement - WC has ground fighting, the burden of proof is on them and since this is a internet forum and we live in the video age, then a simpel video should be able to answer that query.

I understand what you are saying. My question to them isn't "do you have a video?" (they might -- of them doing it against their student - ala Victor - just like we have that video of the WCK guy stopping the takedown! but again, what would that prove? so then we get into that wasn't a good enough video, and so forth), but rather "have you gone to a good BJJ school and tried it?"

My point is that video won't convince people. There already is lots of video of what fighting is really like, what you are going to face, etc. yet it hasn't convinced people. The only way to convince them is FOR THEM TO EXPERIENCE IT DIRECTLY.

MY personal experience is mine and has nothig to do with someone elses comment.

All any of us have is our personal experience. That's precisely my point.

I have seen nothing decent about WC in terms of ground work, but I also admit I have not seen EVERY one that has ever done WC doing ground work, so I ask, "SHOW ME" and guess what, I am entitiled to ask that of someone that makes a comment that WC does have ground work and it is effective.
It then falls on the comment maker to PROVE his point.

Claim: WCK can stop the takedown. Here's video proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKML3jfwDA

LOL! Feel better? Convince you? Settle it once and for all?

How do you go about convincing THAT guy that what he is talking about and doing is utter nonsense? What video do you offer to prove to him that he is wrong?

My point is that he needs to be SHOWN with direct personal experience -- and if he visited a good MMA school, he's see that he was taken down at will and all his "theory" is nonsense. IMO that's the ONLY way.

Ultimatewingchun

04-23-2010, 07:44 AM

"I agree. These days, it's easy to make a vid and post it. If you are going to make an assertion, there should be some type of evidence to back it up. Doesn't necessarily have to be one's own clip (unless the assertion is that you can do it yourself), but something to provide evidence." (Knifefighter)
.............................

***AND ALL THE MORE REASON to be highly suspicious of 3/4's of what gets typed on Terence Niehoff's computer. If this guy is so convinced that he knows what he's talking about - he shouldn't always be telling people to go train/spar/roll with this one or that one - to back up his constant barrage of assertions...

assertions about what he "knows"....or "thinks" he knows, and what he thinks about what others are doing and saying around here.

Not even one :rolleyes: video of himself doing absolutely anything after aff these years???!!! :o

And then he offers up the lamest bull imaginable about that: that since he had to do "so much" to get what he's finally "learned"....why shoud he share that with the rest of the people he has appointed himself preacher to!!!!!!!!????

Ha! That's pathetic.:cool:

God, I've come to love the IGNORE list....:)

Knifefighter

04-23-2010, 07:48 AM

Claim: WCK can stop the takedown. Here's video proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKML3jfwDA

LOL! Feel better? Convince you? Settle it once and for all?

For that guy to convince us that his approach was valid all he would have to do is to post a clip of him doing that against someone with good mechanics who was actually trying to take him down.

Knifefighter

04-23-2010, 07:52 AM

"I agree. These days, it's easy to make a vid and post it. If you are going to make an assertion, there should be some type of evidence to back it up. Doesn't necessarily have to be one's own clip (unless the assertion is that you can do it yourself), but something to provide evidence." (Knifefighter)
.............................

***AND ALL THE MORE REASON to be highly suspicious of 3/4's of what gets typed on Terence Niehoff's computer. If this guy is so convinced that he knows what he's talking about - he shouldn't always be telling people to go train/spar/roll with this one or that one - to back up his constant barrage of assertions...

assertions about what he "knows"....or "thinks" he knows, and what he thinks about what others are doing and saying around here.

Not even one :rolleyes: video of himself doing absolutely anything after aff these years???!!! :o

And then he offers up the lamest bulll about that imaginable: that since he had to do "so much" to get what he's finally "learned"....why shoud he share that with the rest of the people he has appointed himself preacher to!!!!!!!!????

Ha! That's pathetic.:cool:

God, I've come to love the IGNORE list....:)

You know what's even more annoying? You constantly posting the same thing about him over and over again.

You keep complaining about him posting the same thing over and over again, yet you just add to it with your complaining.

We understand he is on your ignore list. Pretty soon people are going to put you on Ignore so they can avoid your rants against him.

Ultimatewingchun

04-23-2010, 07:56 AM

Doubt it very highly. I've received dozens of pm's agreeing with me about this very subject: The guy's hypocritical double standard has become a complete joke.

t_niehoff

04-23-2010, 07:58 AM

For that guy to convince us that his approach was valid all he would have to do is to post a clip of him doing that against someone with good mechanics who was actually trying to take him down.

Dale, you are looking at these things from the perspective of someone who is highly trained, who knows what to look for (good mechanics), etc. but my point is that the great majority of TMAists aren't looking with your eyes. You EARNED your eyes (your discernment) through your EXPERIENCE, and you look at things informed by that experience. These people don't have that experience. They won't see it. The video evidence is already out there and they don't see it, that's why it doesn't convince them. This is why they fall for the theoretical nonsense that they do.

That's why I am saying that while (good) video might convince YOU, it won't convince them.

t_niehoff

04-23-2010, 08:02 AM

You know what's even more annoying? You constantly posting the same thing about him over and over again.

You keep complaining about him posting the same thing over and over again, yet you just add to it with your complaining.

We understand he is on your ignore list. Pretty soon people are going to put you on Ignore so they can avoid your rants against him.

What's funny is that I am on his "ignore list" YET he constantly responds to my posts! He even starts entire threads (WCK isn't attached fighting) to respond to my views.

So, is he ignoring me or not? ;) Why put me on an "ignore list" if he isn't going to ignore me?

Knifefighter

04-23-2010, 08:10 AM

What's funny is that I am on his "ignore list" YET he constantly responds to my posts! He even starts entire threads (WCK isn't attached fighting) to respond to my views.

So, is he ignoring me or not? ;) Why put me on an "ignore list" if he isn't going to ignore me?

For a guy who is ignoring you, he sure does a lot of ranting about you. :rolleyes:

I thought the ignore list was for people you were going to ignore.

Kind of defeats the purpose in his case.

Ultimatewingchun

04-23-2010, 08:24 AM

I've got the best of all worlds going on here, Dale...

I don't get aggravated or taken off topic by reading his redundant trash again-and-again...and yet I still occasionally get to point out (because people sometimes quote him)...how disengenuous and full-of-5hit he is!!!!!!

It's a beautiful thing...:D ;) :cool:

grasshopper 2.0

04-23-2010, 07:27 PM

Phil Redmond

04-23-2010, 10:45 PM

SAAMAG

04-23-2010, 11:04 PM

Yep...some of the few guys that can make it work. Good representation of wing chun in my opinion. It looks like wing chun and its done against resisting opponents.

Pacman

04-24-2010, 01:27 AM

rant away sunshine you are coming from a false premis if its aimed at me...... i wanted to see it because i believe what alan shows is wing chun in action, and since others do not agree i want to see what they think good wing chun is, i know what fighting looks like i know what grappling looks like i now want to see what these people who keep saying all the clips are not wing chun actually consider good wing chun and good fighting

the truth is a lot of the clips of amateur fights posted recently dont really look like anything except sloppy fighting. it doesnt matter if it was WC or MT, its all very sloppy.

these fighters have not broken their natural reactions during a pressure situation so that they stay within the posture etc of whatever their style is.

the only reason some people will say "this is what ____ looks like in a real fight" or "this is what ____ will look like with someone bigger" is because in their experience they were never able to make ____ a part of them, to make it natural, so under a pressure situation their subconscious takes over and they revert to whatever IS natural to them. this usually happens when you have a person who studies a little of this a little of that, jumping from school to school and style to style.

you look at the pro MT fighters. they do 1000 kicks a day. they live and breathe it. keeping the MT posture and style of movement is as natural as walking no matter what the situation.

most WC people, and other amateurs, do not have this training programmed into them.

when i say something doesnt look like WC, its not because it doesnt resemble a static demo. its because it doesnt have the most fundamental WC principles like simultaneous offense and defense, constant pressure, etc.

YungChun

04-24-2010, 01:33 AM

Frost

04-24-2010, 02:24 AM

the truth is a lot of the clips of amateur fights posted recently dont really look like anything except sloppy fighting. it doesnt matter if it was WC or MT, its all very sloppy.

these fighters have not broken their natural reactions during a pressure situation so that they stay within the posture etc of whatever their style is.

the only reason some people will say "this is what ____ looks like in a real fight" or "this is what ____ will look like with someone bigger" is because in their experience they were never able to make ____ a part of them, to make it natural, so under a pressure situation their subconscious takes over and they revert to whatever IS natural to them. this usually happens when you have a person who studies a little of this a little of that, jumping from school to school and style to style.

you look at the pro MT fighters. they do 1000 kicks a day. they live and breathe it. keeping the MT posture and style of movement is as natural as walking no matter what the situation.

most WC people, and other amateurs, do not have this training programmed into them.

when i say something doesnt look like WC, its not because it doesnt resemble a static demo. its because it doesnt have the most fundamental WC principles like simultaneous offense and defense, constant pressure, etc.

sloppy boxing still looks like boxing, sloppy thai still looks like thai, they are using the same techniques just not as crisp or sharp as the pros, i can still see the fundermental principles as you call it of hands uo, head movement, initiating power from the ground up etc

and for every sloppy Thai/boxing fight we can post a video of pros doing it correctly, and pro thai/mma guys in the west for the most part have jobs and don't train full time and yet they still manage to look like their art, how come we have yet to see a handful of videos that show wing chun in action that people actually agree looks like wing chun should look?

YungChun

04-24-2010, 02:32 AM

how come we have yet to see a handful of videos that show wing chun in action that people actually agree looks like wing chun should look?

I think there are a handful of clips folks agree on...

VT is problematic for (I'll pick) 3 simple reasons:

1. Most VT fighters aren't.. (fighting)

2. Most VT does not train realistically (hard contact, lots of energy)

3. Most VT is not VT... IOW there isn't even agreement on what VT is...or how to train it..

Honestly, if the Old Man could see this forum, I know he'd laugh his azz off...

Frost

04-24-2010, 03:36 AM

I think there are a handful of clips folks agree on...

VT is problematic for (I'll pick) 3 simple reasons:

1. Most VT fighters aren't.. (fighting)

2. Most VT does not train realistically (hard contact, lots of energy)

3. Most VT is not VT... IOW there isn't even agreement on what VT is...or how to train it..

Honestly, if the Old Man could see this forum, I know he'd laugh his azz off...

in that case and this is a serious question why bother training in it, and would you sugest to a new student why is looking to be able to fight to go elsewhere?

Ultimatewingchun

04-24-2010, 05:53 AM

"when i say something doesnt look like WC, its not because it doesnt resemble a static demo. its because it doesnt have the most fundamental WC principles like simultaneous offense and defense, constant pressure, etc." (Pacman)

***AND AGAINST any good fighter, (not even one who throws 1,000 kicks per day)....you're just not going to see simultaneous offense and defense along with constant pressure even half as much you think you should.

It's just not in the nature of reality fighting (or sparring) here in 2010 - unless you're waaaay beyond your opponent in both amount of training and size. Wing Chun was developed in China hundreds of years ago - and not so as to be able to deal with serious boxing skills - which were unknown to the founders of the art.

And so the wing chun principles you mention that must be present at all times cannot be present at all times in the real world of now.

This is a very tired argument that needs to be put to rest.

t_niehoff

04-24-2010, 06:00 AM

"when i say something doesnt look like WC, its not because it doesnt resemble a static demo. its because it doesnt have the most fundamental WC principles like simultaneous offense and defense, constant pressure, etc." (Pacman)

***AND AGAINST any good fighter, (not even one who throws 1,000 kicks per day)....you're just not going to see simultaneous offense and defense along with constant pressure even half as much you think you should.

It's just not in the nature of reality fighting (or sparring) here in 2010 - unless you're waaaay beyond your opponent in both amount of training and size. Wing Chun was developed in China hundreds of years ago - and not] so as to be able to deal with serious boxing skills - which were unknown to the founders of the art.

And so the principles you mention that [B]must be present at all times cannot be present at all times in the real world of now.

This is a very tired argument that needs to be put to rest.

You're not going to see these things in outside fighting because they are not a part of outside, unattached fighting (for example, how can you have "forward pressure" unless you are in contact?).

The founders knew what they were doing -- it's just many of the practitioners today have no idea what the founders were doing.

YungChun

04-24-2010, 01:41 PM

in that case and this is a serious question why bother training in it, and would you sugest to a new student why is looking to be able to fight to go elsewhere?

I never suggest VT..to noobs.. Depending on what they think they want.. I most often suggest Judo or BJJ..

k gledhill

04-24-2010, 04:52 PM

You're not going to see these things in outside fighting because they are not a part of outside, unattached fighting (for example, how can you have "forward pressure" unless you are in contact?).

The founders knew what they were doing -- it's just many of the practitioners today have no idea what the founders were doing.

forward pressure is aka attacking with or intent to make attacking actions, that place the recipient under constant pressure. The pressure creates or breeds mistakes, they present themselves from placing the recipient under constant attacking pressure. Opponents may turn away from the pressure of the sustained assault, they may go defensive and further the % in our favor.

terence you have yet to meet a VT fighter so hold the "Our Founders Speech" ...you may regret it ;)

My er, theory may have validity , you simply have not encountered it personally. Its not commercial, doesn't do dvds or books....it trains hard !:D
confusing.

Ultimatewingchun

04-24-2010, 07:06 PM

Pacman

04-24-2010, 07:47 PM

sloppy boxing still looks like boxing, sloppy thai still looks like thai, they are using the same techniques just not as crisp or sharp as the pros, i can still see the fundermental principles as you call it of hands uo, head movement, initiating power from the ground up etc

and for every sloppy Thai/boxing fight we can post a video of pros doing it correctly, and pro thai/mma guys in the west for the most part have jobs and don't train full time and yet they still manage to look like their art, how come we have yet to see a handful of videos that show wing chun in action that people actually agree looks like wing chun should look?

if those non pro guys look more like their art then its because they have trained enough so that their art is a part of them, despite not being professional. they have made it as natural as breathing or walking.

some of these amateur fights, it doesnt really look much like anything except sloppy fighting.

the reason we cant agree and havent seen it is simple and it is this

To look like MT or boxing, all you have to do is perform the physical movements. Just mimic the actual punches kicks elbows for MT. Mimic the punches and head movement in boxing. Karate or TKD is the same thing. If you have elementary physical coordination then you can qualify.

Wing Chun is not just about the actual movement, but the tactics and strategies. It can be very open to interpretation (as a result many different views) and why some people think this qualifies and others think it doesnt. what WC is.

On top of that, every WC school has different requirements. Some WC schools tell you how to stand, how to put up your hands while others are more liberal. Everybody has their own idea, but its all under the same name of WC.

So basically you have an open interpretation of the physical movements and an open interpretation of the theory behind the fight.

As a result, its real easy to misinterpret and abuse the curriculum and real easy to screw up learning the whole thing.

Pacman

04-24-2010, 07:50 PM

in that case and this is a serious question why bother training in it, and would you sugest to a new student why is looking to be able to fight to go elsewhere?

not all WC schools are bad. some are some aren't. its like shopping for anything else. if i find a good WC school it doesnt matter if there are crap schools out there under the WC name.

Pacman

04-24-2010, 07:55 PM

i dont see how you can come to this conclusion. doesnt matter if you fight a boxer. if someone throws a cross at you, instead of bobbing and weaving and then punching (the boxing way) or blocking and then punching (the karate way), you weave and punch or block and punch at the same time. its about combining two movements into one so you can stay one step ahead and not staying on the defense.

some people misunderstand and think that you have to hit and block your oppnent at the exact same time, or some bullcrap about beats in fighting, its about having that mentality in your training and your fight.

"when i say something doesnt look like WC, its not because it doesnt resemble a static demo. its because it doesnt have the most fundamental WC principles like simultaneous offense and defense, constant pressure, etc." (Pacman)

***AND AGAINST any good fighter, (not even one who throws 1,000 kicks per day)....you're just not going to see simultaneous offense and defense along with constant pressure even half as much you think you should.

It's just not in the nature of reality fighting (or sparring) here in 2010 - unless you're waaaay beyond your opponent in both amount of training and size. Wing Chun was developed in China hundreds of years ago - and not so as to be able to deal with serious boxing skills - which were unknown to the founders of the art.

And so the wing chun principles you mention that must be present at all times cannot be present at all times in the real world of now.

This is a very tired argument that needs to be put to rest.

Pacman

04-24-2010, 07:57 PM

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 05:34 AM

how do you have forward pressure when unattached? one simple example not confined to wing chun:

if i throw a jab at you, is that putting pressure on you? yes. is that disrupting you? yes. am I attached? no

There is no real PRESSURE there. As you say that you train YKS WCK, then you know that dong (press) is one of your key words, right? And it refers to pressing like with an iron.

Pressure is the application of force to something by something else in direct physical contact with it (straight from the dictionary).

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 05:40 AM

My God..."The founders knew what they were doing"...!!!!!! :eek: :rolleyes: :cool:

This coming from the most disrespectful guy to ever post on this forum...

no respect whatsoever for all the wing chun masters, grandmasters, sifus, etc...

but somehow - (oh, it's SO AMAZING)...somehow...

the "I'll switch sides and tell the new story as it suits my convenience" lawyer...

has decided....thinking that nobody's gonna see it...thinking that nobody's going to recall...

all his countless posts...

ripping all the wing chun founders/masters/grandmasters/sifus apart...

HAS DECIDED...NOW THAT HIS "side"...

is making claims about having some "true understanding" of what wing chun was always supposed to be about...

HE'S COME TO THE REVELATION...

oh yes,...Terence has been BORN AGAIN, HALLOLUYAH...

he's come to the realization that the great founders, masters, grandmasters, and sifus...

THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING ALL THE TIME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:p ;) :D

Victor, the forms, drills, faat, kuit, etc. all come from the ancestors (they put the art together, right?). There is even a kuit that tells us."The method comes from the ancestors, the key is adapting it to the present." While I say the ancestors knew what they were doing, that does not mean that every practitioner, whether sifu or so-called grandmaster, does. Most obviously don't.

You really lack basic thinking skills. And you might try medication.

Pacman

04-25-2010, 11:02 AM

There is no real PRESSURE there. As you say that you train YKS WCK, then you know that dong (press) is one of your key words, right? And it refers to pressing like with an iron.

Pressure is the application of force to something by something else in direct physical contact with it (straight from the dictionary).

oh, you're going to use websters to prove a point now?

you're really stretching. whatever websters definition is, the WC concept of keeping constant pressure on someone means to constantly disrupt them so they cannot do what they intend to.

what you said is true when you have already bridged the gap, but there is an outside application of the concept too. one that you probably didn't learn. im not surprised, its difficult to master three styles on wing chun in such a short time.

btw, not that it matters:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pressure

...
...
5. the state of being pressed or compressed.
6. harassment; oppression: the pressures of daily life.
7. a constraining or compelling force or influence: the social pressures of city life; financial pressure.
8. urgency, as of affairs or business: He works well under pressure.
...
...

Knifefighter

04-25-2010, 11:13 AM

how do you have forward pressure when unattached? one simple example not confined to wing chun:

if i throw a jab at you, is that putting pressure on you? yes. is that disrupting you? yes. am I attached? no

By that definition, you could be dancing around on your toes, moving backwards and throwing out jabs and keeping pressure on your opponent, but that would not be forward pressure

Forward pressure means forward intent at all times. Continuous forward pressure makes it very easy to be taken down.

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 12:02 PM

oh, you're going to use websters to prove a point now?

Just to prove that I am saying what I intend to say (as opposed to giving a word my own definition).

you're really stretching. whatever websters definition is, the WC concept of keeping constant pressure on someone means to constantly disrupt them so they cannot do what they intend to.

The word "pressure" defined by Webster's is precisely what you NEED to do when attached. "Constant forward pressure" isn't some silly WCK "concept", it is one of the things you need to do when in contact with an opponent, i.e., put physical pressure on him, as that's what limits his ability to move, sets things up, etc.

what you said is true when you have already bridged the gap, but there is an outside application of the concept too. one that you probably didn't learn. im not surprised, its difficult to master three styles on wing chun in such a short time.

Yes, 29 years is such a "short time." ;)

There is no "outside application of the concept". Forward intent isn't forward pressure.

btw, not that it matters:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pressure

...
...
5. the state of being pressed or compressed.
6. harassment; oppression: the pressures of daily life.
7. a constraining or compelling force or influence: the social pressures of city life; financial pressure.
8. urgency, as of affairs or business: He works well under pressure.
...
...

The only one that matters is #5 which pertains to the state of being pressure (having direct physical force applied to you).

Pacman

04-25-2010, 01:22 PM

By that definition, you could be dancing around on your toes, moving backwards and throwing out jabs and keeping pressure on your opponent, but that would not be forward pressure

Forward pressure means forward intent at all times. Continuous forward pressure makes it very easy to be taken down.

well if you are moving backwards, an opponent with half a brain would not feel pressure as you are moving f@rther away and cannot touch him with the jab. i thought it was fairly obvious and there was no need to specify this

In any case I was responding to T's challenge and the point is that you do not need to be attached.

i was just giving one example of how you can apply pressure without the need to be attached.

takedown? you are doing what most people do and confusing constant forward pressure/intent with the need to be constantly charging into your opponent

btw, this censoring on the forum is horrible. you cannot say f@rther because it contains the substring f@rt

Pacman

04-25-2010, 01:25 PM

**** 29 years you sure wasted a lot of time and money.

im not giving a word my own definition. have you heard of someone saying something like "i have a lot of pressure at work", does it mean they are experiencing 283498329423942938 PSI of atmospheric of pressure in their office building? do you have aspergers syndrome without the genius?

for someone who's definition of WC is so liberal, i find it difficult to believe that opening your mind to another application of this concept is so difficult.

Just to prove that I am saying what I intend to say (as opposed to giving a word my own definition).

The word "pressure" defined by Webster's is precisely what you NEED to do when attached. "Constant forward pressure" isn't some silly WCK "concept", it is one of the things you need to do when in contact with an opponent, i.e., put physical pressure on him, as that's what limits his ability to move, sets things up, etc.

Yes, 29 years is such a "short time." ;)

There is no "outside application of the concept". Forward intent isn't forward pressure.

The only one that matters is #5 which pertains to the state of being pressure (having direct physical force applied to you).

Knifefighter

04-25-2010, 01:41 PM

takedown? you are doing what most people do and confusing constant forward pressure/intent with the need to be constantly charging into your opponent

What I am saying is I am looking specifically to get either forward pressure or forward movement from my opponent when I want to take him down. If he continues to apply either of those things continuously he makes my job just that much easier.

Pacman

04-25-2010, 02:00 PM

What I am saying is I am looking specifically to get either forward pressure or forward movement from my opponent when I want to take him down. If he continues to apply either of those things continuously he makes my job just that much easier.

i wrestled for four years in high school so i know about takedowns too.

if a guy is coming straight at me, right in front of me, then yes its easy to take him down. if a guy is so concentrated on hitting me in the face and throwing punches at me (i assume this is your definition forward pressure) its real easy to hit a double on him (actually to do anything to him he wont notice)

but forward intent/movement does not require you to come straight at the person

the best way to avoid double and single leg takedowns (or any other attack where the opponent is shooting towards you) is lateral movement, being offset from the opponents center, which is what wing chun aims to do. you can move forward and move in, and be off the center of your oppnents attack

Knifefighter

04-25-2010, 02:06 PM

the best way to avoid double and single leg takedowns (or any other attack where the opponent is shooting towards you) is lateral movement, being offset from the opponents center, which is what wing chun aims to do. you can move forward and move in, and be off the center of your oppnents attack

You wrestled in H.S. I doubt it. Takedowns always need an angle.

Moving in and and laterally gives your opponent a "half man" which is half of what he needs for the takedown. Add in the top-heavy component of WC and you are giving the takedown away.

Pacman

04-25-2010, 02:48 PM

You wrestled in H.S. I doubt it. Takedowns always need an angle.

Moving in and and laterally gives your opponent a "half man" which is half of what he needs for the takedown. Add in the top-heavy component of WC and you are giving the takedown away.

takedowns always need an angle? depends on what takedown. you're telling me its easier to get a double leg, when your target is at 10 oclock or 2 oclock instead of 12 oclock?

so to avoid takedowns, i should stay right smack dab in front of my opponent?

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 03:47 PM

**** 29 years you sure wasted a lot of time and money.

im not giving a word my own definition. have you heard of someone saying something like "i have a lot of pressure at work", does it mean they are experiencing 283498329423942938 PSI of atmospheric of pressure in their office building? do you have aspergers syndrome without the genius?

for someone who's definition of WC is so liberal, i find it difficult to believe that opening your mind to another application of this concept is so difficult.

We're not talking about "pressure at work" -- we're talking about pressure as it pertains to WCK. Atmospheric pressure is closer -- it is direct, physical force being applied against you by the weight of the atmosphere.

And as I said, pressure isn't a "concept." That you think in terms of concepts is part of the problem. You have "ideas" that you try to apply, "ideas" of how you think things should work, "ideas" that you translate to be whatever the hell you want. All of that is nonsense. You don't need concepts and they only get in the way.

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 03:49 PM

takedowns always need an angle? depends on what takedown. you're telling me its easier to get a double leg, when your target is at 10 oclock or 2 oclock instead of 12 oclock?

so to avoid takedowns, i should stay right smack dab in front of my opponent?

You don't need angles to perform takedowns but angles give you much better leverage. Moreover, angles greatly help you to get past the defense for takedowns.

The way to avoid takedowns in the clinch is to control the clinch.

Pacman

04-25-2010, 04:25 PM

We're not talking about "pressure at work" -- we're talking about pressure as it pertains to WCK. Atmospheric pressure is closer -- it is direct, physical force being applied against you by the weight of the atmosphere.

And as I said, pressure isn't a "concept." That you think in terms of concepts is part of the problem. You have "ideas" that you try to apply, "ideas" of how you think things should work, "ideas" that you translate to be whatever the hell you want. All of that is nonsense. You don't need concepts and they only get in the way.

everyone has their own idea with what is and what isn't WC. the fact remains that with your take on pressure, you have not been able to make your WC work on the outside, and with my take on pressure, i and im sure many others, have.

in your other thread you critique victor for his stand on WC not being attached because he has no logic to back it up.

my logic for backing up my take on keeping pressure on your opponent is the other two concepts (very similar) of not retreating and loy lau hui sung. the end result of both of those is keeping constant pressure on your opponent.

that is a key ingredient of WC. you can ______ sau and chung choi all you like but if you do not adhere to those concepts it is not complete WC

t_niehoff

04-25-2010, 05:02 PM

everyone has their own idea with what is and what isn't WC.

That's the problem -- everyone has "ideas" (concepts). That's all nonsense.

the fact remains that with your take on pressure, you have not been able to make your WC work on the outside, and with my take on pressure, i and im sure many others, have.

No, you haven't. Nor have they. Go to a good boxing/kickboxing gym and see. You'll be destroyed.

WCK doesn't have the tools for the outside -- just like it doesn't have the tools for the ground. Boxing/kickboxing has those tools. That's why all the WCK people who try to make it work on the outside end up adopting boxing/kickboxing tools.

in your other thread you critique victor for his stand on WC not being attached because he has no logic to back it up.

Yup.

my logic for backing up my take on keeping pressure on your opponent is the other two concepts (very similar) of not retreating and loy lau hui sung. the end result of both of those is keeping constant pressure on your opponent.

The kuit "loi lau" pertain to contact, to attached fighting (it makes no sense to "stay/remain as he comes" on the outside). On the outside, you NEED - unless you are fighting a complete scrub - to continually move in and out. If you just keep coming forward, your going to walk into his punches. If you are going to stalk him, then you need a lot of evasive body/head movement to get ot the inside or you will eat a lot of punches. Stop sparring with scrubs, get yourself to a good boxing gym, and you'll see that I'm telling you the truth.

that is a key ingredient of WC. you can ______ sau and chung choi all you like but if you do not adhere to those concepts it is not complete WC

WCK is an approach to fighting, and it is described by the faat. If you are a YKS practitioner as you claim, you should know that faat. Hell, it's in Rene's book. If your sifu hasn't taught it to you or if he just doesn't know, find yourself a new sifu.

WCK begins and ends with the faat.

goju

04-25-2010, 05:04 PM

That's the problem -- everyone has "ideas" (concepts). That's all nonsense.

so what you post is nonsense as well going by this statement you just made:D:rolleyes:

Ultimatewingchun

04-25-2010, 05:11 PM

There's a way around the censoring, Pacman. Like this:

f a r t

;)

As in, a bad wind that you hope disappears as quickly as possible. Kinda remind you of a few people around here? :cool:

Knifefighter

04-25-2010, 05:45 PM

takedowns always need an angle? depends on what takedown. you're telling me its easier to get a double leg, when your target is at 10 oclock or 2 oclock instead of 12 oclock?

so to avoid takedowns, i should stay right smack dab in front of my opponent?

Pretty much. The idea of a single leg or double leg is to get an angle to be able to penetrate. It's very hard to get a takedown by coming straight up the middle (which would be the cr@ppy takedowns you see the TMA guys who have no grappling experience attempting to perform). Then you use more of an angle (turn the corner, run the pipe, etc) to finish.

And yes, to avoid the takedown, you prevent the opponent from getting his angle.

Pacman

04-25-2010, 06:52 PM

Pretty much. The idea of a single leg or double leg is to get an angle to be able to penetrate. It's very hard to get a takedown by coming straight up the middle (which would be the cr@ppy takedowns you see the TMA guys who have no grappling experience attempting to perform). Then you use more of an angle (turn the corner, run the pipe, etc) to finish.

And yes, to avoid the takedown, you prevent the opponent from getting his angle.

your misunderstanding. im not talking about whether or not its best for the recipient to be at an angle when receiving the double. of course the best is to meet your opponent straight on. when you sprawl you need to push your hips forward.

im talking about this

to do a double leg you have to shoot forward, right. typically a person can shoot best straight forward, just like a person can walk most naturally when he walks straight.

the best defense someone can have is to stay off this line. its common sense. its like not standing in front of a train.

namron

04-25-2010, 07:01 PM

You wrestled in H.S. I doubt it. Takedowns always need an angle.

Moving in and and laterally gives your opponent a "half man" which is half of what he needs for the takedown. Add in the top-heavy component of WC and you are giving the takedown away.

I dont have a great depth of experience in grappling, but this is both intuitively what I have always felt as well as realistically when training takedowns (and defence) at local MMA/wrestling centres.

Particularly with the 'top heavy', foward pressure, the structure is very open to level change and take down, especially if you are head hunting with your shots.

I am interested in alan orrs training methods with respect to takedown defense, would be interested to know dale if you have looked at any of his stuff and can add any constructive comments?

Pacman

04-26-2010, 01:52 AM

what do you mean by top heavy? do you mean that some WC practitioners stand with their back straight as a board?

not all WC practitioners do that.

t_niehoff

04-26-2010, 04:28 AM

so what you post is nonsense as well going by this statement you just made:D:rolleyes:

Concepts are - for the most part - nonsense. What are they but SOMEONE's "ideas"on how YOU SHOULD do WCK. For example, that you should never step backward. The first point is WHOSE idea? Most probably someone who has little to no real skill using (fighting with) their WCK -- regardless of their "title". In other words, you are following the ideas of someone who can't ride a bike on how to best ride a bike. Blind leading the blind. Do you think that is a good way to become a good bike rider?

And you don't NEED concepts -- boxing, wrestling, and all other athletic activities hardly refer to concepts. Instead, you are just SHOWN what to do, how to do it, etc. and then you get on DOING it.

Concepts are mainly blinders, preconceptions that are self-limiting. You learn to ski by skiiing, not by "understanding the concepts of skiiing". It's the same with WCK.

goju

04-26-2010, 04:31 AM

Concepts are - for the most part - nonsense. What are they but SOMEONE's "ideas"on how YOU SHOULD do WCK. For example, that you should never step backward. The first point is WHOSE idea? Most probably someone who has little to no real skill using (fighting with) their WCK -- regardless of their "title". In other words, you are following the ideas of someone who can't ride a bike on how to best ride a bike. Blind leading the blind. Do you think that is a good way to become a good bike rider?

And you don't NEED concepts -- boxing, wrestling, and all other athletic activities hardly refer to concepts. Instead, you are just SHOWN what to do, how to do it, etc. and then you get on DOING it.

Concepts are mainly blinders, preconceptions that are self-limiting. You learn to ski by skiiing, not by "understanding the concepts of skiiing". It's the same with WCK.

"When your backs to a corner post circular talking gibberish as a defense!!"

sun tzu -the art of war

mun hung

04-26-2010, 06:10 PM

Phil Redmond

04-27-2010, 11:15 AM

Wow! Haven't been around for a while, but I see nothing's changed. :)

Victor's sparring might not be pretty, but he should get some credit for trying to apply what he knows. How many armchair warriors are there on this board anyway? Plenty!
Lol, I'm waiting for a vid from Terence so I can see what we all are doing wrong. But he'll say go to someone good and that says a lot. ;)

Ultimatewingchun

04-27-2010, 11:30 AM

You know, it's got to be a good 6 years or so by now...wherein this forum has been hearing from Terence that we've got it all wrong, and that what he's been doing is the way to make wing chun work.

And according to him, there were some 23 years before that wherein he's been doing wing chun.

And yet, after all that background, and especially when considering the thousands of posts he's made over the last 6 years - virtually every one of which is a reminder of some kind that we've got it all wrong...

and yet: NOT EVEN ONE VID OF THIS GUY BACKING UP ANY OF HIS CLAIMS !!!???!!!

That should speak volumes, particularly to those folks who have only started posting here within the last 2-3 years (or even more recently than that)...and have been inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I'll tell ya what there's no doubt about: There's basically nothing about wing chun that this guy can make work.

And with an ego like his (notwithstanding the fact that it's really a giant mask of insecurity)...nonetheless...with an ego like his...if he could make anything within wing chun work:

HE WOULD HAVE POSTED SOMETHING BY NOW.