The Wing Chun Enigma (streetfighting)

[Ultimatewingchun]

Again, lots of people will disagree and perhaps even take offense to this, but wing chun is a very limited fighting style, since it's based on very close quarter striking, and basically nothing about it has anything to do with fighting in the clinch or on the ground.

Notice that I said nothing about it's limitations from longer ranges than very close standup striking range. Something that I've talked about numerous times on this forum.

Because most (if not all) streetfights are going to close the distance from long to short range very quickly. There are basically no Muhammad Ali type streetfights, or kickboxing type streetfights either. That kind of thing is very, very rare in everyday life.

So for close quarter, standup streetfighting, wing chun can be very good. It has it's limitations (ie.- no clinch or ground material)...but for what it is, it can be very good, depending upon the person using it of course.

But in a ring/cage/mma setting...it's limitations become even more apparent. Not just because the fighters in such events have more room to maneuver, and are doing do so on a perfectly smooth and non-hostile surface - but because they are better trained than the typical guy on the street, who quite often charge in swinging wildly or going for some half-a55ed grab or football tackle.

Not that wing chun doesn't have some good moves to put on a more sophisticated striker, but stories of wing chun street success (and I'm not necessarily doubting the stories)...is often based upon facing the typical non-seriously trained streetfight mentality/abilites coming at you.

The enigma is that wing chun PURE AND SIMPLE...has pluses and minuses that are highly misunderstood.

Discuss....

[sanjuro_ronin]

I agree, WC is a highly specialized "fist", like SPM for example.
Here is the thing, if a system doesn't work in the ring, with a set confine for both fighters and with set environment and even time to train for a fight, how can it possibly work in the street with No rules and a variable environment with an unknown opponent?
The answer is that, when it works, the opponent was NOT very good.

[Frost]

I agree, WC is a highly specialized "fist", like SPM for example.
Here is the thing, if a system doesn't work in the ring, with a set confine for both fighters and with set environment and even time to train for a fight, how can it possibly work in the street with No rules and a variable environment with an unknown opponent?
The answer is that, when it works, the opponent was NOT very good.

i agree these arts worked fine in an enviroment when others practised short arm styles that were similar in nature: did not want to clinch and throwfor example but these days people fight differently with a different emphasis and if the arts can't evlove then maybe they should die out

[sanjuro_ronin]

i agree these arts worked fine in an envirnoment when others practised short arm styles that were similar in nature: did not want to clinch and throwfor example but these days people fight differently with a different emphasis and if the arts can't evlove then maybe they should die out

Many of the points of these short arm systems was to "counter the bridge" and typcially that bridge was either a "LONG" strike or an attempted grab and under these situations, they work very well.
The problem is that systems like WC and SPM (Bak mei and lung yung too) is that they NEED to be cross-tested outside their comfort zone.
This was NOT a problem in the past but is one now.
The more specialized the hand, the more cross system testing needs to be done.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"The problem is that systems like WC...NEED to be cross-tested outside their comfort zone. This was NOT a problem in the past but is one now. The more specialized the hand, the more cross system testing needs to be done." (sanjuro)
.....................

***AND THE RESULT of such cross system testing is/will inevitably be crosstraining, imo. Through the years I've worked against guys with boxing skills, karate and kickboxing skills, wrestling and jiu jitsu skills...

and the demands of dealing with what goes on today go waaaay beyond what wing chun was originally designed to do. Yes, it's a specialized art.

Has a lot to offer in it's close quarter standup (non-clinch) range, but needs some form of crosstraining (and of course continued cross testing) to evolve and flourish in the 21 ft century.

Perhaps the biggest enigma of all at this point in time is how and why is it that so many wing chun/ving tsun/wing tsun people are so slow to see this?

MMA, with all it's faults and deficiencies, should nonetheless be opening people's eyes. Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater (as people like Terence are wont to do)...but to see what can be kept, what discarded, what modified, and what to add from other systems.

This requires an honest look at the system, without being blinded by wing chun street success against streetfighter types - and without the anti-wing chun mindset that comes from training in other systems or having failed to learn and develop good wing chun when you did do it back in the day.

[Knifefighter]

Has a lot to offer in it's close quarter standup (non-clinch) range, but needs some form of crosstraining (and of course continued cross testing) to evolve and flourish in the 21 ft century.

Perhaps the biggest enigma of all at this point in time is how and why is it that so many wing chun/ving tsun/wing tsun people are so slow to see this?

No, the enigma is why so many WC guys fail to see that it is actually a pretty effective outside defensive fighting system, but starts to fall apart at closer range.

Watch most WC guys fight. Many of them can actually be pretty good at keeping people outside. Things start to fall apart (or they have learned to use other tools from other systems) once things get inside. The WC guys who have adapted use the clinch, boxing, Muay Thai, takedowns, etc. tools on the inside. The guys who have not adapted, usually have those tools used against them on the inside and get shut down.

Watch your own clips. Most of your WC techs were used further out as defensive counters. As soon as you got inside, you went for the takedown because that's where your WC falls apart.

[Ultimatewingchun]

No, the enigma is why so many WC guys fail to see that it is actually a pretty effective outside defensive fighting system, but starts to fall apart at closer range.

Watch most WC guys fight. Many of them can actually be pretty good at keeping people outside. Things start to fall apart (or they have learned to use other tools from other systems) once things get inside. The WC guys who have adapted use the clinch, boxing, Muay Thai, takedowns, etc. tools on the inside. The guys who have not adapted, usually have those tools used against them on the inside and get shut down.

Watch your own clips. Most of your WC techs were used further out as defensive counters. As soon as you got inside, you went for the takedown.

***COME ON, Dale...those clips are against a guy 5 inches taller and 40 lbs. heavier. Of course I was being cautious about coming in on him. Didn't you revisit the 2nd vid as I suggested? Didn't you recognize the close quarter moves I was using in that sequence...the one I suggested looking at with the sound off? In particular the first 5 seconds of that vid?

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

By that part in the sparring I was pretty comfortable in seeing what it was he was trying to do, and I was able to use a whole bunch of close quarter wing chun moves (ie.- bil, pak, pak, bong/wu-lop, gum, palm strike)...

If I was sparring another guy more my size, you might have seen a much more aggressive approach to coming in, and staying close once I got there...without necessarily going for a takedown.

I get your point about training (crosstraining) for all ranges...have been in that mindset before you even appeared on this forum...and I've always agreed with you that crosstraining is a must once you did appear.

[shawchemical]

"The problem is that systems like WC...NEED to be cross-tested outside their comfort zone. This was NOT a problem in the past but is one now. The more specialized the hand, the more cross system testing needs to be done." (sanjuro)
.....................

***AND THE RESULT of such cross system testing is/will inevitably be crosstraining, imo. Through the years I've worked against guys with boxing skills, karate and kickboxing skills, wrestling and jiu jitsu skills...

and the demands of dealing with what goes on today go waaaay beyond what wing chun was originally designed to do. Yes, it's a specialized art.

Has a lot to offer in it's close quarter standup (non-clinch) range, but needs some form of crosstraining (and of course continued cross testing) to evolve and flourish in the 21 ft century.

Perhaps the biggest enigma of all at this point in time is how and why is it that so many wing chun/ving tsun/wing tsun people are so slow to see this?

MMA, with all it's faults and deficiencies, should nonetheless be opening people's eyes. Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater (as people like Terence are wont to do)...but to see what can be kept, what discarded, what modified, and what to add from other systems.

This requires an honest look at the system, without being blinded by wing chun street success against streetfighter types - and without the anti-wing chun mindset that comes from training in other systems or having failed to learn and develop good wing chun when you did do it back in the day.

You are so wrong in your assertions on this point. Cross training doesn't mean incorporating those techniques into wing chun, but learning how the techniques are used, and utilising the tools within VT to better deal with them accordingly. This is a personal development, not something which VT has a problem with. It's not a specialised combat system any more so than Muay thai or boxing or BJJ, other than its use of direct rather than circular strikes.

In clinch range is exactly where it thrives. And closing from long range is precisely what it is good at, so your assumption that these are flaws of the combat system make little sense at all.

The goal is not to fight someone where they are comfortable, but to impose your own will on the man, as you wish it and not as they feel comfortable.

Yes we need to honestly look at what is being done, but this question should be DID I IMPLEMENT my tools effectively or not, if yes, can I make it better or if no, Was the technique correct, or did something I did mean that it was either incorrect at the time, or could it have been done better using another tool?

This comment"and the demands of dealing with what goes on today go waaaay beyond what wing chun was originally designed to do. Yes, it's a specialized art." is your most ridiculous.

To consider that when developed, death was a real possibility in any confrontation against someone trained in any system gives little credence to your comment. The question you have to ask yourself is given the LOWER challenges of what goes on today, what is different in application, I would offer the suggestion that the quality of training intensity can probably explain much of the associated weaknesses you feel exist.

[Knifefighter]

It's not a specialised combat system any more so than Muay thai or boxing or BJJ, other than its use of direct rather than circular strikes.

Ummm... Muay Thai and bjj ARE specialized systems.


To consider that when developed, death was a real possibility in any confrontation against someone trained in any system gives little credence to your comment.
Death in an confrontation is probably more of a possibility today than it was then.

[YungChun]

No, the enigma is why so many WC guys fail to see that it is actually a pretty effective outside defensive fighting system, but starts to fall apart at closer range.


I think most of us agree with this.... It depends though on what we mean by close range, etc.. VT does NOT want to be that close (clinch) for the most part.. although there is a single bow-tie in the classical art..



Watch most WC guys fight. Many of them can actually be pretty good at keeping people outside. Things start to fall apart (or they have learned to use other tools from other systems) once things get inside.


Again it depends on what is which range--how close is close. For most stand-up fighters VT wants to be very close, but to most grapplers VT does NOT want to be that close (clinch)..

VT's preferred distance is IMO the range where you can strike your opponent without taking any step to do so..and just a tad closer (for penetration of strikes)... AKA the Kill Zone..

VT wants to get into that zone safely (and stay there, often with angling/contact) and then unleash a centerline barrage of attacks (and energy) in a short time... and that's mainly it... Setting aside the inside leg work designed to impede the opponent's movement and something even fewer folks seem to train.

Again, as per another post.. I ask why don't we see more folks at least attempting to apply their VT and not (once we are really fighting) suddenly look like they never trained VT? IOW few attempts to even try to apply the basics, forget about how well it works, because if you didn't even attempt using the VT then there is no way to judge its effectiveness.

[Knifefighter]

Again, as per another post.. I ask why don't we see more folks at least attempting to apply their VT and not (once we are really fighting) suddenly look like they never trained VT? IOW few attempts to even try to apply the basics, forget about how well it works, because if you didn't even attempt using the VT then there is no way to judge its effectiveness.

And I posted 3 clips of guys attempting to apply it.

As for the guys who don't attempt it (the guys in the MMA environment), by the time they have reached the level of being able to compete in MMA, they have figured out that they cannot use it against MMA fighters and need to switch to a somewhat different approach. Their training preparation usually teaches them that.

[YungChun]

And I posted 3 clips of guys attempting to apply it.



Okay well I don't think your serious about the topic except to trash all that is VT.

Attempting to apply techniques, tactics means you see those things either work or fail in fighting...

It does not mean repeatedly going over clips with a microscope just to find even one VT tool, weapon or tactic..

As you pointed out: It's very easy to see MT, WB, BJJ, etc, in real fighting.. It is just as easy to see VT in fighting if it is there.. Whether it works or not is another issue.. :)

A little easier to see more VT tactics at work here..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ3-Hi-kMNo

Also easier to see them here..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzlDFKNoJ2M

Should have explained to them that it wouldn't work before they went to all the trouble of kicking azz with it...

[LSWCTN1]

I agree, WC is a highly specialized "fist", like SPM for example.
Here is the thing, if a system doesn't work in the ring, with a set confine for both fighters and with set environment and even time to train for a fight, how can it possibly work in the street with No rules and a variable environment with an unknown opponent?
The answer is that, when it works, the opponent was NOT very good.

you have to remember that street fighting is VERY different.

stamina is rarely an issue. by the time you have to draw on your reserves the police are there taking you both away...

street fights only take ONE good shot. on the whole.
there is often a lot of 'fluff' in between until one person gets that one good shot. EVERYONE knows that one punch specialist... thats why people who have some sort of realistic training tend to do better - they can spot and capitalise on that opportunity

does anyone think that different systems have spent probably hundreds of years developing their own IP ideas and it not really work.

you harden the hands, you hit with a more solid mass. more KO chance. simples!

but by all means, sparring and competition is an excellent way to test your skills outside of your comfort zone.

good example is the olympic TKD guys. most of them are useless and look ridiculous. most other TKD is the same. there ARE odd exceptions however that can make the TKD they teach their students work.

competition is good, very good in fact. but it is NOT the be all and end all

[sanjuro_ronin]

you have to remember that street fighting is VERY different.
Yes, in the street, typicaly,the other guy is NOT a trained fighter.


stamina is rarely an issue. by the time you have to draw on your reserves the police are there taking you both away...

I would disagree with this from what I have seen, I have seen way too many guys "gas" in fights, oh the start off ok, thinking all it takes is a good shot, problem is they don;t have it and after wailing for 30 seconds, they gas.


street fights only take ONE good shot. on the whole.
there is often a lot of 'fluff' in between until one person gets that one good shot. EVERYONE knows that one punch specialist... thats why people who have some sort of realistic training tend to do better - they can spot and capitalise on that opportunity

ANy fight just takes ONE good shot, the problem is GETTING that one good shot.
Outside of sucker punches or a trained fighter VS a scrub, you don't see it and youtube, as an example, is full of proof of that.


but by all means, sparring and competition is an excellent way to test your skills outside of your comfort zone.

That is what they are for, to an extent and if use properly.

TKD is an example of all that can be wrong with competitive MA.


competition is good, very good in fact. but it is NOT the be all and end all

Agreed.

[t_niehoff]

There is no enigma. Most WCK people are terrible fighters because THEY DO NOT TRAIN LIKE FIGHTERS. Period.

[Knifefighter]

stamina is rarely an issue. by the time you have to draw on your reserves the police are there taking you both away...

street fights only take ONE good shot. on the whole.
there is often a lot of 'fluff' in between until one person gets that one good shot.
Fluff? Oh, you mean the part where the opponents are going at 100% trying to hurt each other and not getting hurt in the process? No, that's not fatiguing at all. :rolleyes:



EVERYONE knows that one punch specialist... thats why people who have some sort of realistic training tend to do better - they can spot and capitalise on that opportunity
One punch KO's happen in both sport and street. They are equally as rare in each.


does anyone think that different systems have spent probably hundreds of years developing their own IP ideas and it not really work.
Yep, they are all over the place.


you harden the hands, you hit with a more solid mass. more KO chance. simples!
The extra mass in miniscule. A few ounces at most.



good example is the olympic TKD guys. most of them are useless and look ridiculous. most other TKD is the same. there ARE odd exceptions however that can make the TKD they teach their students work.
Actually, many of them would stomp people who are average martial artists. I'm betting you've never sparred an actual olympic level TKD practioner, so you are speaking out of your @ss.

[Frost]

you have to remember that street fighting is VERY different.

stamina is rarely an issue. by the time you have to draw on your reserves the police are there taking you both away...

street fights only take ONE good shot. on the whole.
there is often a lot of 'fluff' in between until one person gets that one good shot. EVERYONE knows that one punch specialist... thats why people who have some sort of realistic training tend to do better - they can spot and capitalise on that opportunity

does anyone think that different systems have spent probably hundreds of years developing their own IP ideas and it not really work.

you harden the hands, you hit with a more solid mass. more KO chance. simples!

but by all means, sparring and competition is an excellent way to test your skills outside of your comfort zone.

good example is the olympic TKD guys. most of them are useless and look ridiculous. most other TKD is the same. there ARE odd exceptions however that can make the TKD they teach their students work.

competition is good, very good in fact. but it is NOT the be all and end all

as pointed out by others, fights on the street are rarely over with one punch, and with the adreline of the confrontation and the explosive way it almost always kicks of conditioning does come into play if the fight lasts longer than 20 seconds or so, and how many fights have you seen last less than this? as soon as your heart rate goes up you are in danger of gassing, and this can happen during all that fluff you talk about:rolleyes:

as for the tkd example, those guys fight according to their rules and at least they go full contact with the kicks and actually compete...and i remember the case of one stunt guy who before going into movies fought at the OL games, then went into kick boxing and won his first 12 fights all with knockouts...maybe you should tell him how useless his art is

competition may not be the be all and end all but it beats sitting at your PC deluding yourself about what might and might not work in a fight

[Knifefighter]

BTW, the average police response time is about 4 minutes (and this is after someone calls them which will add to the total time). It takes about 60 seconds of high intensity activity to cause lactic acid build-up that starts affecting fatigue levels and ability to perform.

Do the math.

[Wayfaring]

Actually, many of them would stomp people who are average martial artists. I'm betting you've never sparred an actual olympic level TKD practioner, so you are speaking out of your @ss.

True. Olympic wrestlers are even tougher.

[Wayfaring]

BTW, the average police response time is about 4 minutes (and this is after someone calls them which will add to the total time). It takes about 60 seconds of high intensity activity to cause lactic acid build-up that starts affecting fatigue levels and ability to perform.

Do the math.

Larger cities it's longer. Vegas ~45min - 1 hr. LA - same.

[grasshopper 2.0]

I agree, WC is a highly specialized "fist", like SPM for example.
Here is the thing, if a system doesn't work in the ring, with a set confine for both fighters and with set environment and even time to train for a fight, how can it possibly work in the street with No rules and a variable environment with an unknown opponent?
The answer is that, when it works, the opponent was NOT very good.

Hmm..how about this analogy,

If the above is true, then couldn't you say if a tank is good on all on terrain, then shouldn't it be good for the streets?

if a porsche is good for the streets, then it should be good for the race track?

and so on..

[Knifefighter]

Hmm..how about this analogy,

If the above is true, then couldn't you say if a tank is good on all on terrain, then shouldn't it be good for the streets?

if a porsche is good for the streets, then it should be good for the race track?

and so on..

The problem is that WC is not a streetfighting art. Unles part of the curriculum is to actually go out get in street fights, analyze specifics in terms of technique, strategy, tactics, etc, and base the training on the feedback from those streetfights, they it won't be in the future.

If a system is going to be termed a streetfighting system, a major proportion of the training needs to be based on actually going out and doing those kinds of fights.

[Wayfaring]

Hmm..how about this analogy,


One of the problems with WC is too many analogies.

[t_niehoff]

The problem is that WC is not a streetfighting art.


Exactly. I'd add that "street fighting art" is one of those myths, like "complete martial art", that is used to sell WCK to the gullible (it sounds so tough, doesn't it? this is for street, not sport!). It's a fantasy. But it allows theoretical nonfighters to get around not actually being able to apply their art -- this is for the street, not the ring, and that's why you never see anyone do it.

[HumbleWCGuy]

To some extent WC is street fighting. Kung fu is typically trained with shoes on which makes the kicking that is used in WCK a bit different. In addition, the the vertical fist is a far superior weapon on the street than the horizontal fist because it is much more structurally sound. The horizontal fist is often favored in the ring for its ability to cut.

Wing chun is decidedly street oriented compared to something like Muay Thai or boxing which are almost strictly taught as a ring sport.

[t_niehoff]

To some extent WC is street fighting. Kung fu is typically trained with shoes on which makes the kicking that is used in WCK a bit different.


No it doesn't.



In addition, the the vertical fist is a far superior weapon on the street than the horizontal fist because it is much more structurally sound. The horizontal fist is often favored in the ring for its ability to cut.


Complete nonsense. The "vertical fist" isn't more "structurally sound" -- nothing in the fist or wrist changes with the rotation, the only thing that changes is that your ulna and radius twist, and that doesn't alter the soundness of your arm's structure in any way. WCK uses a vertical fist because we keep our elbows down (and you can't keep you elbow pointed down and use a horizontal fist). And, the horizontal fist doesn't cut anymore than a vertical fist.



Wing chun is decidedly street oriented compared to something like Muay Thai or boxing which are almost strictly taught as a ring sport.

You're reasoning that since something isn't a sport, then it must be "street oriented"is unsound.

[Knifefighter]

If anything, a "horizontal fist" is more structurally sound.

[t_niehoff]

If anything, a "horizontal fist" is more structurally sound.

I assume you mean that you can strike more powerfully with a "horizontal fist" (since that frees the elbow, and so permits greater weight transfer into your punches)?

[Knifefighter]

I assume you mean that you can strike more powerfully with a "horizontal fist" (since that frees the elbow, and so permits greater weight transfer into your punches)?

Yeah, that.

[HumbleWCGuy]

If anything, a "horizontal fist" is more structurally sound.

The obvious answer is that you don't have any punching power so holding for fist either way doesn't really seem to make a difference to you. It's an obvious mistake that I would expect from you. It might be worth noting that structural strength is slightly different issue than striking leverage.

[goju]

i dont notice too much of a difference in power when my fist is kept vertical vs horizontal

in certainstrikes like the hook punch the fist kept in a verical postion is a better idea;)

[HumbleWCGuy]

i dont notice too much of a difference in power when my fist is kept vertical vs horizontal

in certainstrikes like the hook punch the fist kept in a verical postion is a better idea;)

If you are talking the same arm mechanics with the exception of the way the fist is turned there isn't a any power difference except for the close range were the vertical fist has an edge.

A lot of times when people are talking about the Wing Chun cross not being as powerful as a boxing cross it is usually because Wing Chunners throw a very tight cross and boxers may open their cross up a bit more.

[Niersun]

Again, lots of people will disagree and perhaps even take offense to this, but wing chun is a very limited fighting style, since it's based on very close quarter striking, and basically nothing about it has anything to do with fighting in the clinch or on the ground.

Notice that I said nothing about it's limitations from longer ranges than very close standup striking range. Something that I've talked about numerous times on this forum.

Because most (if not all) streetfights are going to close the distance from long to short range very quickly. There are basically no Muhammad Ali type streetfights, or kickboxing type streetfights either. That kind of thing is very, very rare in everyday life.

So for close quarter, standup streetfighting, wing chun can be very good. It has it's limitations (ie.- no clinch or ground material)...but for what it is, it can be very good, depending upon the person using it of course.

But in a ring/cage/mma setting...it's limitations become even more apparent. Not just because the fighters in such events have more room to maneuver, and are doing do so on a perfectly smooth and non-hostile surface - but because they are better trained than the typical guy on the street, who quite often charge in swinging wildly or going for some half-a55ed grab or football tackle.

Not that wing chun doesn't have some good moves to put on a more sophisticated striker, but stories of wing chun street success (and I'm not necessarily doubting the stories)...is often based upon facing the typical non-seriously trained streetfight mentality/abilites coming at you.

The enigma is that wing chun PURE AND SIMPLE...has pluses and minuses that are highly misunderstood.

Discuss....

The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.

The kickboxer i sparred with had a lethal kick. I think his kicks could of broken anybodies ribs or buckle their legs. To say KB isnt effective on the street is not true.

On the street, you have a mindset of a lion. Most of the Wing Chun practioners i see, do not have any ferocity when they train, and the way you train is the way you play. Most i see just wanna learn chi sao and be better than the other guy at chi sao and are not really fighters.

Instead of bil sao, kick and front step, chain punch, your students should be learning bil sao, bil jee to the eyes, front kick to the groin and stomp to the knee.

Your students should also be trained in getting taken to the ground, and trained to recover by attacking the eyes when mounted, or taking the arm with a pak sao, cheun sao, larp sao when on the bottom, to pull the opponent to the side.

Anyhow, if all your training is punches and front kicks as your first motion of attack or counter, them maybe you need to revise that. Bil Jee first, end the fight just like that. Not rocket science. End the fight as soon as possible.

[YungChun]

The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.

The kickboxer i sparred with had a lethal kick. I think his kicks could of broken anybodies ribs or buckle their legs. To say KB isnt effective on the street is not true.

On the street, you have a mindset of a lion. Most of the Wing Chun practioners i see, do not have any ferocity when they train, and the way you train is the way you play. Most i see just wanna learn chi sao and be better than the other guy at chi sao and are not really fighters.

Instead of bil sao, kick and front step, chain punch, your students should be learning bil sao, bil jee to the eyes, front kick to the groin and stomp to the knee.

Your students should also be trained in getting taken to the ground, and trained to recover by attacking the eyes when mounted, or taking the arm with a pak sao, cheun sao, larp sao when on the bottom, to pull the opponent to the side.

Anyhow, if all your training is punches and front kicks as your first motion of attack or counter, them maybe you need to revise that. Bil Jee first, end the fight just like that. Not rocket science. End the fight as soon as possible.

Are you affiliated with Robert Downey Junior?

See the Letterman segment in this clip...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p3yyiIkzLk

He's totally "down with that" it would seem..! :cool:

[Frost]

The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.

The kickboxer i sparred with had a lethal kick. I think his kicks could of broken anybodies ribs or buckle their legs. To say KB isnt effective on the street is not true.

On the street, you have a mindset of a lion. Most of the Wing Chun practioners i see, do not have any ferocity when they train, and the way you train is the way you play. Most i see just wanna learn chi sao and be better than the other guy at chi sao and are not really fighters.

Instead of bil sao, kick and front step, chain punch, your students should be learning bil sao, bil jee to the eyes, front kick to the groin and stomp to the knee.


Your students should also be trained in getting taken to the ground, and trained to recover by attacking the eyes when mounted, or taking the arm with a pak sao, cheun sao, larp sao when on the bottom, to pull the opponent to the side.
Anyhow, if all your training is punches and front kicks as your first motion of attack or counter, them maybe you need to revise that. Bil Jee first, end the fight just like that. Not rocket science. End the fight as soon as possible.

oh lord here we go again:eek:

[YungChun]

oh lord here we go again:eek:

Just go with it.. ;)

[Frost]

Just go with it.. ;)

its like we are in a time warp and its the 90's all over again:eek:

[YungChun]

its like we are in a time warp and its the 90's all over again:eek:

I think that's what they mean by "Forever Springtime"... :p:D:cool:

[Niersun]

Are you affiliated with Robert Downey Junior?

See the Letterman segment in this clip...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p3yyiIkzLk

He's totally "down with that" it would seem..! :cool:

Ive studied TWC briefly at the Melbourne Academy. We are from the same lineage.


its like we are in a time warp and its the 90's all over again

Nothing has changed in street fighting since then, other than more people are learning to fight, taking roids and getting drunk.

Just simply replying to what was stated.

[goju]

oh lord here we go again:eek:

and with the charles atlas body builting kit you will defeat those bullies who kicked over your sand castle by training only 15 minutes a day!

[Frost]

Ive studied TWC briefly at the Melbourne Academy. We are from the same lineage.



Nothing has changed in street fighting since then, other than more people are learning to fight, taking roids and getting drunk.

Just simply replying to what was stated.

I’ll be clearer then, I thought these beliefs about just poke him in the eye or grab him balls when mounted or simply poke his eyes in the clinch had been confined to the last decade and no one believed this rubbish anymore

Obviously i was wrong

[goju]

makes you wonder why they invented grappling to begin with if it is that easy to defeat it:D

[Niersun]

makes you wonder why they invented grappling to begin with if it is that easy to defeat it:D

I dont know why i wasted my time.

Obviously, you guys have already made up your mind, instead of training for it back in 90s which would make you guys half decent by now.

Im assuming you guys like your UFC. Jujitsu in that context is a sport, no fouls aloud. Therefore you dont see it, but when you do, you see the other guy needing to take a break before recommencing. I have seen a few UFC fights where someone gets poked in the eye and cant fight for 30secs or more.

Anyhow, if you dont train to take a hit (full contact sparring), then your gonna flinch in the real life situation. Therefore, it is not the technique that is wrong, its the person and the way they train.

Grappling has its uses, but real fights are won with strikes.

[goju]

if i take you down i will snap your arm/ leg/fingers immediately or choke you silly( and with the blades of my forearm against your adams apple too not the nice friendly way the bjj guys do XD)

and guess what this isnt because im a bjj guy or an mma fan boy i learned this in karate

my grappling knowledge(however basic) combined with my ability to fight dirty > just your notion you will happen to poke this or that at the right time:rolleyes:

[YungChun]

I dont know why i wasted my time.

Obviously, you guys have already made up your mind, instead of training for it back in 90s which would make you guys half decent by now.

Im assuming you guys like your UFC. Jujitsu in that context is a sport, no fouls aloud. Therefore you dont see it, but when you do, you see the other guy needing to take a break before recommencing. I have seen a few UFC fights where someone gets poked in the eye and cant fight for 30secs or more.

Anyhow, if you dont train to take a hit (full contact sparring), then your gonna flinch in the real life situation. Therefore, it is not the technique that is wrong, its the person and the way they train.

Grappling has its uses, but real fights are won with strikes.

Instead of popping in on the board like Jeannie and pontificating about ancient martial myths to folks with, in some cases, 30 years experience, why not introduce yourself and tell us about your background and training.... :)

[Frost]

I dont know why i wasted my time.

Obviously, you guys have already made up your mind, instead of training for it back in 90s which would make you guys half decent by now.

Im assuming you guys like your UFC. Jujitsu in that context is a sport, no fouls aloud. Therefore you dont see it, but when you do, you see the other guy needing to take a break before recommencing. I have seen a few UFC fights where someone gets poked in the eye and cant fight for 30secs or more.

Anyhow, if you dont train to take a hit (full contact sparring), then your gonna flinch in the real life situation. Therefore, it is not the technique that is wrong, its the person and the way they train.

Grappling has its uses, but real fights are won with strikes.

i agree with reasoning like this i too don't know why you bother :eek:

So you are a half decent fighter then please post your fight record for us to be in awe of........:)

Oh Snap i have watched a few MMA fights can i play too....how about that japanese fighter who get blinded in a no rules match...he still one though using grappling isn,t that funny

No BJJ is not a sport it is a martial art that tests itself under a variety of rules and competitions, maybe you should try it sometime before making comments about it

As for real fights being won by striking this was put to bed back in the 90's by a variety of people...geoff thompson using judo to beat the cr*p out of people on the doors....SBG coaches Paul Sharp and rodney king posting pages on the net of when they and other cops/security guys used suplexs, double legs and various other throwsto end bad situations....hell UFC fighter lee murrey once ended a bar fight over hear by suplexing a guy trying to hit him with a pool cue

[goju]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51bFUtRVrvL.jpg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kwf9jjHEBM1qzsca0o1_500.gif

why do grappling when you could just walk in a place and do this to a bjj guy!!!:D

sigh the thing that people like this fail to realize

1. your dirty move may fail.... then what?

2. a competent grappler will be able to control you on the ground AND( this is the most important part folks) be able to dig inot your eyes, pull your hair and other nasty things

why would you assume just because they dont allow those techniques in comps that the grappler wouldnt do it outside of that?

[shawchemical]

Ummm... Muay Thai and bjj ARE specialized systems.


Death in an confrontation is probably more of a possibility today than it was then.

1, death in a confrontation is "probably more of a possibility" ****ing idiot.

[shawchemical]

If anything, a "horizontal fist" is more structurally sound.

Good to see you continue to fail at life.

[shawchemical]

Again, lots of people will disagree and perhaps even take offense to this, but wing chun is a very limited fighting style, since it's based on very close quarter striking, and basically nothing about it has anything to do with fighting in the clinch or on the ground.

Notice that I said nothing about it's limitations from longer ranges than very close standup striking range. Something that I've talked about numerous times on this forum.

Because most (if not all) streetfights are going to close the distance from long to short range very quickly. There are basically no Muhammad Ali type streetfights, or kickboxing type streetfights either. That kind of thing is very, very rare in everyday life.

So for close quarter, standup streetfighting, wing chun can be very good. It has it's limitations (ie.- no clinch or ground material)...but for what it is, it can be very good, depending upon the person using it of course.

But in a ring/cage/mma setting...it's limitations become even more apparent. Not just because the fighters in such events have more room to maneuver, and are doing do so on a perfectly smooth and non-hostile surface - but because they are better trained than the typical guy on the street, who quite often charge in swinging wildly or going for some half-a55ed grab or football tackle.

Not that wing chun doesn't have some good moves to put on a more sophisticated striker, but stories of wing chun street success (and I'm not necessarily doubting the stories)...is often based upon facing the typical non-seriously trained streetfight mentality/abilites coming at you.

The enigma is that wing chun PURE AND SIMPLE...has pluses and minuses that are highly misunderstood.

Discuss....

Do you understand what enigma means victor?? Doesn't sound like it.

[YungChun]

If anything, a "horizontal fist" is more structurally sound.



Agreed if by "structurally sound" you refer to the noise it will make when it breaks.. :D

"Yeah that" indeed.. LOL

There is simply no comparison in structural soundness between the two assuming you understand how to do the VF.. Your assertion should make one question the validity of any and all "facts" you present.

[Ultimatewingchun]

By enigma I meant that wing chun does have something of a reputation for being an effective street art (ie.- realism)...while at the same time being notably absent from being pronounced "the winner" in mma fighting - which is also noteworthy for it's realism.

How it that? Hence, wing chun is a bit of an enigma (mystery).

And then I proceeded to give what I believe are the reasons for this "enigma".

[Dragonzbane76]

The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.

seriously???

I have a stunning revelation. why not learn judo or BJJ/JJJ for clinch and grappling instead of relying on eye pokes and groin grabs that might not work at all.

[t_niehoff]

By enigma I meant that wing chun does have something of a reputation for being an effective street art (ie.- realism)...


No it doesn't. That's one of those many myths that WCK (and TCMA) people try to promote about themselves (I don't hear nonWCK people saying it).

And, that myth is built on a false premise -- that there are "street arts" and martial "sports" (the old street vs. sport nonsense). Wrong. There is only what works and what doesn't.

The problem is, however, that lots of stuff "works" (you can sometimes get away with it) at either low levels of intensity or against poorly skilled fighters (scrubs) but fails when under the pressure of very high intensity (power, speed, etc.) and/or against skilled fighters (who are much better at taking advantage of an opponent's weakness).

This is significant because when something "works" in light sparring or "in the street" against a scrub, often the "logical" leap is made that it is good, sound, and will always work. However, whatever it is that worked could just as easily be "junK" (a wrestling term for something that only works at lower levels of competition). The ONLY way to know is to try it at higher levels of competition (intensity and/or against skilled fighters).

Sound fighting technique, skills, etc. work at the highest levels of intensity and against very good fighters. The ONLY way to know if something is sound is by using it at that level.

Therein lies one of the many problems with "concepts" or a conceptual approach btw.



while at the same time being notably absent from being pronounced "the winner" in mma fighting - which is also noteworthy for it's realism.


As I indicated above, this signifies that something you are doing (training, technique, etc.) is fundamentally unsound.



How it that? Hence, wing chun is a bit of an enigma (mystery).


There is no mystery or enigma.



And then I proceeded to give what I believe are the reasons for this "enigma".

How many WCK people go and train with good, proven fighters at MMA or MT gyms? Because if you do not do THAT, there is no possible way you will be able to make your WCK work against them. The WCK people who have been successful in MMA have done that.

If you boxed but never sparred against good, skilled boxers but only against (other) scrubs, and then you tried sparring with good boxers, what do you think would happen? Is there any mystery or enigma about that?

The truth is that we are only as good as our training/sparring partners. So when your training/sparring partners are scrubs, how is there any mystery or enigma as to why you can't hold your own against good fighters?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Agreed if by "structurally sound" you refer to the noise it will make when it breaks.. :D

"Yeah that" indeed.. LOL

There is simply no comparison in structural soundness between the two assuming you understand how to do the VF.. Your assertion should make one question the validity of any and all "facts" you present.

You guys aren't gonna start that old "vertical VS horizontal" crap, are you?

[m1k3]

The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.



LOL, you got taken down and mounted by a KICKBOXER!!! :eek:

You pull that with a trained grappler he will arm bar you.

[Frost]

[QUOTE=Niersun;1008848]The fight should end quickly and not be taken to the ground. If your in the clinch, knee to groin and if one arm is free, claw your opponents eyes.
I sparred a kickboxer out on day release and when he mounted me, i grabbed his nuts. a bit bad for sparring, but i got him to get off me.

./QUOTE]

LOL, you got taken down and mounted by a KICKBOXER!!! :eek:

You pull that with a trained grappler he will arm bar you.

lets be honest this is a story made up to make himself sound like he knows what he is doing :)

[SAAMAG]

Sound fighting technique, skills, etc. work at the highest levels of intensity and against very good fighters. The ONLY way to know if something is sound is by using it at that level.

How many WCK people go and train with good, proven fighters at MMA or MT gyms? Because if you do not do THAT, there is no possible way you will be able to make your WCK work against them. The WCK people who have been successful in MMA have done that.


Sooo then here's your logic:

Technique works against people in your class
Technique doesn't work against elite fighters
Therefore technique is junk

While that logic seems sound it is not. If your technique doesn't work against an elite fighter, it's not the technique but moreso the discrepency in skill level between yourself and the elite fighter. That's why you've not been able to do it (yet). You're completely omitting all the other variables which could be inhibiting your ability to apply your wing chun.

The second part of it (whereby you cite that "x" person's wing chun hasn't been tested in mma) -- while there have been successful testings of wing chun in mma, no one's wc has been tested at elite levels in MMA.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Van,

If you read carefully what Niehoff is saying, it's this:

"Your wing chun is garbage and won't work against highly skilled mma/mt fighters. But MY wing chun (the same as what Alan Orr does) - that wing chun WILL work against skilled fighters."

The same ol' crap from the biggest fraud/troll on the forum. What do ya' expect? :rolleyes:

[Ultimatewingchun]

that someone who feels compelled to repeat what I referenced in my previous post -
HUNDREDS OF TIMES -

is trying, first-and-foremost, to convince himself that what he's saying is true.

Do you remember Fredo from the Godfather part II ?

"I'm smart, Mikey. I'm smart. I'm smart."

That's what we've got going here on this forum with Terence Niehoff.

[t_niehoff]

Van,

If you read carefully what Niehoff is saying, it's this:

"Your wing chun is garbage and won't work against highly skilled mma/mt fighters. But MY wing chun (the same as what Alan Orr does) - that wing chun WILL work against skilled fighters."

The same ol' crap from the biggest fraud/troll on the forum. What do ya' expect? :rolleyes:

No, what I am saying is that NO MATTER WHAT STYLE, ART, ETC. that you practice, or how you view WCK, your skill is determined by the amount of quality sparring you do. And so, YOU ARE ONLY AS GOOD AS YOUR SPARRING PARTNERS. Why can Alan's guys compete in MMA? Because he trains with, spars with, etc. good MMA people. You are not going to develop that level of skill (lightly) sparring with your students. If you are not already doing it, you won't be able to do it.

Victor, you can watch all the catch videos that you want, roll with your students, but you will forever suck as a grappler if you don't go train -- spar -- with good grapplers and spend lots of time doing that. That's why I keep telling you to go to a good gym and see.

[t_niehoff]

Sooo then here's your logic:

Technique works against people in your class
Technique doesn't work against elite fighters
Therefore technique is junk


No, my logic is just because something works in your class doesn't make it good or sound. Lots of crap works against scrubs.



While that logic seems sound it is not. If your technique doesn't work against an elite fighter, it's not the technique but moreso the discrepency in skill level between yourself and the elite fighter. That's why you've not been able to do it (yet). You're completely omitting all the other variables which could be inhibiting your ability to apply your wing chun.


You are missing the point. When you train/spar with very good people they will show you not only what things aren't working but you will see very clearly why they are not working. You're not going to see this working with scrubs where you can get almost anything to work.

This is one of the reasons we get better (at any sport or athletic or competitive activity) by sparring, playing against, etc. very good people. You see very quickly that "oh, I don't want to do that again!" And you see the sorts of things that can and do work against them.



The second part of it (whereby you cite that "x" person's wing chun hasn't been tested in mma) -- while there have been successful testings of wing chun in mma, no one's wc has been tested at elite levels in MMA.

Sure it has -- in the gym. No one in WCK has reached that elite level themselves but that doesn't mean they aren't sparring with or training with people of that level.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Concerning how well a particular technique works against an elite fighter. IMO, there is a standard tool kit that you have to have to fight at a high-level. Those are the basics, once you have these basics, opportunities for the other stuff get created. To use another analogy, when people take the dessert to be the main course, that is where all the problems lie.

[YungChun]

The problem is, however, that lots of stuff "works" (you can sometimes get away with it) at either low levels of intensity or against poorly skilled fighters (scrubs) but fails when under the pressure of very high intensity (power, speed, etc.) and/or against skilled fighters (who are much better at taking advantage of an opponent's weakness).

This is significant because when something "works" in light sparring or "in the street" against a scrub, often the "logical" leap is made that it is good, sound, and will always work.

Of course Terence.. This is a binary problem.. There are no shades of gray.. It either works or not, good or no good, skilled or scrub right? If it doesn't work against top fighters then it's crap right?

Okay, so let me pick your sparring partners.. I guarantee none of your $hit will work against them.. So applying your logic then you and your stuff is fantasy fighting nonsense...


The fact is that fighting or defending yourself in the street is a different animal than sparring and competition, different tactics, different dynamics.. Doesn't mean that a good NHB fighter can't be effective in either case but the fact is these are different animals, where different things "work" or not....

Everyone knows about sparring and sparring good people... (twitch)

[HumbleWCGuy]

If someone has:
Never been in more than 1 or 2 street fights, bounced, worked some kind of security that put them in a lot of physical confrontations, or fought in the ring, it's all theoretical speculation.

For people who have never done any of these things, I suggest that they at least take a night job as a bouncer to have some practical experience to open their eyes.

[t_niehoff]

Of course Terence.. This is a binary problem.. There are no shades of gray.. It either works or not, good or no good, skilled or scrub right? If it doesn't work against top fighters then it's crap right?


No.

To try and explain what I mean, let's approach the issue from another angle, OK. How can we know whether something (technique, mechanic, tactic, etc.) is fundamentally sound or not? From some theory? That you can pull it off against a scrub? How can you tell?

And that is a critical question, because we all only have so much time to train -- and if I am training "junk", stuff that will only work to a certain, low level, then I am short-changing myself -- I'm actually training myself to fail. I could instead be focusing on fundamentally sound stuff -- stuff that isn't self-limiting.

So, how do you KNOW? KNOW. Not guess, not speculate, not theorize. KNOW.

There is a couple ways. First, you can see what is actually working at the highest levels and adopt what they do. Or, as a corollary, you can do what things they did to get to that level. Second, by training/sparring with high quality guys, you will learn what sorts of things can work, and sometimes do work (even if you aren't at their level) -- and what things can't possibly work. Crap and junk will never work against them; sound stuff will, even if you aren't as good, at least put you in the game.



Okay, so let me pick your sparring partners.. I guarantee none of your $hit will work against them.. So applying your logic then you and your stuff is fantasy fighting nonsense...



It's not about beating them -- it's about knowing whether what you are doing is fundamentally sound or not. You don' t understand what I am talking about because you haven't experienced it yourself -- training with good people.

Let me use an example. You may get away with blocking and striking at the same time with your students in sparring. Hell, I can do it against low level guys or in light sparring. But, if you spar with a good boxer, you won't be able to pull them off. And, you'll see why. You'll come to understand why they are very low percentage tactics when not attached. You may never see these things working/sparring with scrubs. But with good people, you'll see it right away.

So, you will not only see the problem, understand why it is a problem, but you will know to look for some other, fundamentally sound answer.

And, you'll see what can work. And you will, with practice, be able to do it too.

Another example, there are certain things you MUST do to not be a sitting duck for a double/single leg shoot. You're not going to learn them by having someone who is a scrub shoot singles on you. But, if you train with a very good wrestler, you'll pick them up quickly, and you will know you NEED to do them. Without those fundamental things, you won't have a chance of stopping a good wrestler or someone who just by luck happens to do a good shoot -- and they will take you down more or less at will. When you learn good fundamental skills, you'll find it gets much more difficult for them to take you down, that you can sometimes stop them even when they are much better, etc.



The fact is that fighting or defending yourself in the street is a different animal than sparring and competition, different tactics, different dynamics.. Doesn't mean that a good NHB fighter can't be effective in either case but the fact is these are different animals, where different things "work" or not....


If it is fundamentally sound, it works anywhere. The stuff that "only" works in the "street" is by definition "junk" or "crap".



Everyone knows about sparring and sparring good people... (twitch)

Everyone may know, but hardly anyone does it. I can tell you haven't.

[SAAMAG]

No, my logic is just because something works in your class doesn't make it good or sound. Lots of crap works against scrubs.
No argument there. But that's not what you were saying. At least that's not the way it comes off. You make it sound like unless you're fighting mma elite that you're skills won't be good enough...or that you won't KNOW if your skills are good enough. That if your skills aren't working against an elite fighter they aren't worth anything. I realize that you've elaborated on this point with another response as well...so by your logic if it works sometimes against an elite than it's a retainable technique?



You are missing the point. When you train/spar with very good people they will show you not only what things aren't working but you will see very clearly why they are not working. You're not going to see this working with scrubs where you can get almost anything to work.

This is one of the reasons we get better (at any sport or athletic or competitive activity) by sparring, playing against, etc. very good people. You see very quickly that "oh, I don't want to do that again!" And you see the sorts of things that can and do work against them.
General accepted knowledge and agreed.



Sure it has -- in the gym. No one in WCK has reached that elite level themselves but that doesn't mean they aren't sparring with or training with people of that level.
Soo then you admit that we all here could be training and excelling in our chosen art through sparring in our respective gyms and with our various sparring partners? I thought you always believed that we'd have to be fighting mma elite? You allow validation through sparring in the gym one minute (to validate your ideas) and the next minute it's not worth anything unless you compete (to downplay other's ideas). Which is it??

[shawchemical]

No.

To try and explain what I mean, let's approach the issue from another angle, OK. How can we know whether something (technique, mechanic, tactic, etc.) is fundamentally sound or not? From some theory? That you can pull it off against a scrub? How can you tell?

And that is a critical question, because we all only have so much time to train -- and if I am training "junk", stuff that will only work to a certain, low level, then I am short-changing myself -- I'm actually training myself to fail. I could instead be focusing on fundamentally sound stuff -- stuff that isn't self-limiting.

So, how do you KNOW? KNOW. Not guess, not speculate, not theorize. KNOW.

There is a couple ways. First, you can see what is actually working at the highest levels and adopt what they do. Or, as a corollary, you can do what things they did to get to that level. Second, by training/sparring with high quality guys, you will learn what sorts of things can work, and sometimes do work (even if you aren't at their level) -- and what things can't possibly work. Crap and junk will never work against them; sound stuff will, even if you aren't as good, at least put you in the game.




It's not about beating them -- it's about knowing whether what you are doing is fundamentally sound or not. You don' t understand what I am talking about because you haven't experienced it yourself -- training with good people.

Let me use an example. You may get away with blocking and striking at the same time with your students in sparring. Hell, I can do it against low level guys or in light sparring. But, if you spar with a good boxer, you won't be able to pull them off. And, you'll see why. You'll come to understand why they are very low percentage tactics when not attached. You may never see these things working/sparring with scrubs. But with good people, you'll see it right away.

So, you will not only see the problem, understand why it is a problem, but you will know to look for some other, fundamentally sound answer.

And, you'll see what can work. And you will, with practice, be able to do it too.

Another example, there are certain things you MUST do to not be a sitting duck for a double/single leg shoot. You're not going to learn them by having someone who is a scrub shoot singles on you. But, if you train with a very good wrestler, you'll pick them up quickly, and you will know you NEED to do them. Without those fundamental things, you won't have a chance of stopping a good wrestler or someone who just by luck happens to do a good shoot -- and they will take you down more or less at will. When you learn good fundamental skills, you'll find it gets much more difficult for them to take you down, that you can sometimes stop them even when they are much better, etc.



If it is fundamentally sound, it works anywhere. The stuff that "only" works in the "street" is by definition "junk" or "crap".



Everyone may know, but hardly anyone does it. I can tell you haven't.

For someone who seems to have a reasonable grasp of the English language, it is continually mind-boggling that you can be so stupid. Willful ignorance is the worst kind.

That YOU cannot manage to make something work against "good" people does nto mean that the techniques themselves are not working, merely that YOU cannot make them work, and thus due to your mindset is NOT a problem with you but with the techniques themselves.

The funny thing about things that work on the "street" is that the reason you don't see most of them in the ring is that they work all together too well. Thus, to prevent harm to valuable commodities (the fighters) the competition organisers who create the rules have decided that such strikes are not allowed.

To make the argument that the reason you don't see these techniques in professional competition because they don't work is redundant. You don't see the techniques primarily because use of such things results in losing the fight - a counter productive behaviour.

Specific examples of this are strikes to the back of the head/neck, heel kicks to the kidneys in guard and the downwards elbow strike to the top of the head. We all know that they work, cause serious injury and great potential harm to the receiver of the blow. However, their potential for damage makes them unpopular for the major shows and the possibility of losing a big money drawcard and thus they are prohibited. Another is the North south position. In most competitions, knees to the head are not allowed here. Thus, the rule set manages to make the "best" technique for this position redundant. IF the rule sets were generally indicative of what happens on the street, any person who finds themselves in this position should be immediately recorded as the loser of the fight due to TKO, and the inability to intelligently and adequately defend themselves.

However, if you find yourself being attacked, the only result which matters is do you walk away. You cannot be disqualified for using such targets and strikes.

Training against good opponents is essential to be as good as you can. This is of course not where we disagree. The training methods used by professional athletes for conditioning should probably be taken for what they are, scientifically proven to produce high quality, strong, fast athletes with great endurance.

However, to move beyond this point, the ability to think critically about yourself and what you are doing becomes paramount. Lying about somethings effectiveness becomes counterproductive. This includes the reasons why something hasn't worked.

Blocking and striking at the same time is probably not the issue if you are standing in front of the man and moving a minimal amount. Similarly, just defending and allowing your opponent to dictate what happens in the fight means you will be more vulnerable than if you are counterattacking.

Additionally, some techniques may not work against a scrub who is massive, can take a punch and is very angry, yet they may work against a very good fighter who cannot take a punch, is much smaller or much slower than the protagonist of our hypothetical discussion. The goal is identification or creation of weakness or vulnerability and successful exploitation of that target.

This should imply that the best people will have a variety of techniques and tactics at their disposal. Making things work for you own body and timing means that you are not the slave of a technique or skill, but that you can bend its application to your desire. Your own blinkered and painfully linear view of everything you post about colours your ability to make appropriate conclusions about the things you discuss.

[YungChun]

Or, as a corollary, you can do what things they did to get to that level. Second, by training/sparring with high quality guys, you will learn what sorts of things can work, and sometimes do work (even if you aren't at their level) -- and what things can't possibly work. Crap and junk will never work against them; sound stuff will, even if you aren't as good, at least put you in the game.

Wow so, we should spar with good fighters..? Where do you come up with these fresh new ideas?



It's not about beating them -- it's about knowing whether what you are doing is fundamentally sound or not.

Of course.. Because when you get your azz handed to you by a "good fighter" then you know you're on the right track!! (As opposed to getting your azz handed to you by a poor fighter, in which case then you didn't learn anything..) (twitch)



You don' t understand what I am talking about because you haven't experienced it yourself -- training with good people.


I've sparred and trained with folks that would beat you silly..



Let me use an example. You may get away with blocking and striking at the same time with your students in sparring.

I never advocated this as high %.. However I don't think that all low % moves are disposable..

However, it is you who consistently say essentially that if anyone here had fought with good people we would all agree and do VT your way... You can deny this but then you'd be FOS.



Everyone may know, but hardly anyone does it. I can tell you haven't.

You can't tell jack...

Anyone who doesn't buy any part of your spiel is dealt your ad hominem BS..

When in fact... If you were half as good as you make yourself out to be (and don't give me this: I don't think I'm that good -- BS -- you've made it clear you think you are better than 99.99% of everyone here) Then you would have attended the sparring get together--not back out in a cowardly fashion at the last minute..

The problem being that if you had attended and then had your azz handed to you even once, that your entire life's work on this forum would have ENDED rather unceremoniously right there and then... :D:p:o:rolleyes:

[t_niehoff]

Soo then you admit that we all here could be training and excelling in our chosen art through sparring in our respective gyms and with our various sparring partners?


No, not at all. You need to spar since fighting skill only comes via sparring. And certainly you will spar within your WCK group. But you need to seek out good sparring partner -- the best you can find -- since you will only be as good as your sparring partners. Most WCK practitioners suck, including the masters and grandmasters.

Look, if you truly appreciate that (1) fighting skill is directly related to the amount of quality sparring you do and (2) you are only as good as your sparring partners (that quality), then ask yourself, how can they (the masters and grandmasters) be any good? They haven't put in the work -- they haven't sparred and certainly not with good fighters. And I'm talking a minimum of hundreds of hours of quality sparring just to develop competence.



I thought you always believed that we'd have to be fighting mma elite? You allow validation through sparring in the gym one minute (to validate your ideas) and the next minute it's not worth anything unless you compete (to downplay other's ideas). Which is it??

Sparring in the gym IS fighting. What do you think sparring is? It's fighting practice -- you develop your fighting skill by fighting. Sparring is practicing fighting. Just like swimming in a pool is practicing swimming.

[LoneTiger108]

You need to spar since fighting skill only comes via sparring. And certainly you will spar within your WCK group. But you need to seek out good sparring partner -- the best you can find -- since you will only be as good as your sparring partners. Most WCK practitioners suck, including the masters and grandmasters.

Wow! I've read plenty of your posts T (and others) on this thread and I think personally this is the one where you tend to lose many credentials. Obviously others just like slinging sh*t at you, but I like to give everyone a fair hearing! :D

If fighting 'skills' only come from sparring then I guess strengthening your skin, tendons and bones on a wooden man are not 'skills' that contribute to your fighting?

If I can presume that you never learnt any wooden man, then I can only presume you have never learnt, or even met, any 'masters' of Wing Chun? :eek:

This puts most of your posts related to Wing Chun in an ever-growing foggy arena, AND you have quoted kuit too! Quite unbelievable really...

[t_niehoff]

Wow so, we should spar with good fighters..? Where do you come up with these fresh new ideas?


By listening to and training with good fighters. Try it sometime.



Of course.. Because when you get your azz handed to you by a "good fighter" then you know you're on the right track!! (As opposed to getting your azz handed to you by a poor fighter, in which case then you didn't learn anything..) (twitch)


You don't understand what I am talking about because you haven't trained with good people. When I roll with my BB BJJ instructor, for instance, I know there is no way in hell, unless he has a stroke while we're rolling, that I will beat him. But he forces me to do good, sound things just to stay in the game -- if I tried anything unsound or stupid, he's crush me in an instant. He forces me to do things right (soundly) since that is the only stuff that stands a chance. But I can roll with the white belts and get away with just about anything.

You keep thinking in terms of winning or losing (getting your ass handed to you, etc.). That's not what I'm talking about -- I'm talking about seeing the soundness of your fundamentals.



I've sparred and trained with folks that would beat you silly..


No you haven't. You wouldn't be saying the crap you are if you had any experience really sparring with good people.



However, it is you who consistently say essentially that if anyone here had fought with good people we would all agree and do VT your way... You can deny this but then you'd be FOS.


You can't tell jack...

Anyone who doesn't buy any part of your spiel is dealt your ad hominem BS..


This isn't an ad hominem attack (before you throw around terms, it helps if you actually know the definition)

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

"The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made)."

Whether you've sparred and/or trained with good people (and, btw, I don't mean spar one time but for significant amounts of time) DOES have a direct bearing on the truth or falsity of your view. That is precisely my point.

If you were to spar/train with good fighters, you'd know why, for instance, training with very good folks, the one's who can in your words "hand you your ass", is absolutely essential. Go to a forum where genuine fighters train and pose the question as to whether or not you need to train spar with very good people and see what answers you get.



When in fact... If you were half as good as you make yourself out to be (and don't give me this: I don't think I'm that good -- BS -- you've made it clear you think you are better than 99.99% of everyone here) Then you would have attended the sparring get together--not back out in a cowardly fashion at the last minute..


I never made any claim that I am that good. What I am saying has nothing to do with whether or not I am "good" -- it has to do with what things we all need to do to develop good skills.

What ****es you and people like Victor off is that if what I am saying is true, then you guys haven't put in the work to develop any significant skills.

Look, I am not that good of a ground grappler. I'm not yet a purple belt. But I know from 5 years of grappling experience with very good grapplers the things anyone who wants to be good must do. I see what good grapplers do, what they don't do, etc. While I am on the path to getting better and to one day (hopefully) be a good grappler, this view isn't based on my skill level -- it is based on the experience training with and sparring with good grapplers. This process is the same for any martial art -- whether boxing or MT or judo or WCK.

Your bring up Victor's "party" -- as I told Victor at the time (and these posts I assume are still out there so look them up), I was initially interested but wanted to have good, decent MMA people there that we all could spar with. It makes absolutely no sense for a bunch of WCK people to get together and lightly spar. That is by definition a circle jerk. If you want to make it a learning experience (the only reason I saw for attending), I want to see what things people are doing that actually will work against decent fighters, not against other scrubs. Victor, the guy who won't go within 1000 feet of a MMA gym, not surprisingly wanted to keep it all WCK -- apparently he likes participating in circle jerks. So, instead I went and competed at NAGA. Of course, we've rehashed this many times before.



The problem being that if you had attended and then had your azz handed to you even once, that your entire life's work on this forum would have ENDED rather unceremoniously right there and then... :D:p:o:rolleyes:

Dude, I get my ass handed to me every single time I train. Haven't you been listening? That's how you get better.

[t_niehoff]

Wow! I've read plenty of your posts T (and others) on this thread and I think personally this is the one where you tend to lose many credentials. Obviously others just like slinging sh*t at you, but I like to give everyone a fair hearing! :D

If fighting 'skills' only come from sparring then I guess strengthening your skin, tendons and bones on a wooden man are not 'skills' that contribute to your fighting?


What you are talking about is CONDITIONING, not skills. Running is great dor developing your cardio, but it isn't fighting skill./



If I can presume that you never learnt any wooden man, then I can only presume you have never learnt, or even met, any 'masters' of Wing Chun? :eek:


I have learned the dummy form, thank you. It does not develop fighting skill -- you can't develop fighting skill by NOT fighting. Just like you can't develop swimming skill by NOT swimming.



This puts most of your posts related to Wing Chun in an ever-growing foggy arena, AND you have quoted kuit too! Quite unbelievable really...

Many people want to believe that by doing forms, exercises (chi sao), the dummy, etc. that they are developing fighting skill. No. They are learning the movements, etc. of the art but that in only the first step to developing skill. Skill is your ability to use those things successfully in fighting.

If you believe that you have skill, go spar with a good fighter and see.

[HumbleWCGuy]

It sounds to me like you don't want to go someplace and lose without having your, "buddies" there to uphold your honor.

You say that you are not that good on the one hand and now you are telling people essentially, that you would get nothing out of sparring WC guys because they aren't up to your standard.

[t_niehoff]

It sounds to me like you don't want to go someplace and lose without having your, "buddies" there to uphold your honor.


No, I simply don't want to waste my time. Look, Victor had his "party" -- what did anyone come away with? Nothing. It was just a WCK picnic.



You say that you are not that good on the one hand and now you are telling people essentially, that you would get nothing out of sparring WC guys because they aren't up to your standard.

No, I'm saying NO ONE would get anything out of it, even a scrub. And no one did.

[YungChun]

You don't understand what I am talking about because you haven't trained with good people.

More AH BS..



But he forces me to do good, sound things just to stay in the game -- if I tried anything unsound or stupid, he's crush me in an instant.

He forces me to do things right (soundly) since that is the only stuff that stands a chance. But I can roll with the white belts and get away with just about anything.

WTF does your BJJ teacher training you have to do with this? NOTHING..

You are babbling..



You keep thinking in terms of winning or losing (getting your ass handed to you, etc.). That's not what I'm talking about -- I'm talking about seeing the soundness of your fundamentals.


No you are talking about sparring with "good people"..

I submit that any time anyone trains and spars with anyone who is better than them, they are sparring with "good people"...



No you haven't. You wouldn't be saying the crap you are if you had any experience really sparring with good people.


More ad-hominem BS.



This isn't an ad hominem attack (before you throw around terms, it helps if you actually know the definition)

Are you kidding me?

You are the ad hominem poster boy...



Whether you've sparred and/or trained with good people (and, btw, I don't mean spar one time but for significant amounts of time) DOES have a direct bearing on the truth or falsity of your view. That is precisely my point.

And your point is precisely horse hockey sir..

I need no sparring experience at all to know what BS is...

Your assertion is that if others don't agree with "name your thesis" then it's because they are lacking in the correct (your) experience..

Any idiot can claim such a thing concerning any aspect of any topic..

It does not address the validity of the subject on it's own terms (debate) rather it simply disqualifies the opposing position based on no relevant facts or discussion...

You are being intellectually dishonest in constantly resorting to such a tactic... You are far better off taking the high ground using your other favorite tactic of asking for video of the "thing" in question.....

There are many things I hear around here that makes me laugh.. I know that the person saying it has no contact experience but to simply post and say, hey you're a douche and clearly have never sparred and so you don't know what you're talking about.. is a cop out and weak.. I would instead address the issue logically and/or ask for evidence.

I won't even waste my time with the rest of your BS..

The point is that there are many levels of skill.. Your experience meaning no more than any one else's experience..

When folks spar with others who are better than themselves they are going to grow.. Do you really think that no one here ever sparred people who are better than them?

And among those people who did or do spar there are many different kinds of skills and experience..

There is no evidence at all to support the idea that your experience is any better than any of the other people here who have done hard actual contact sparring..

If you would like to present evidence be my guest..

And btw.. "They don't because otherwise they would know better.." is not evidence of any kind..

It just wastes everyone else's time.. (which is largely what you do)

[Knifefighter]

If fighting 'skills' only come from sparring then I guess strengthening your skin, tendons and bones on a wooden man are not 'skills' that contribute to your fighting?

If I can presume that you never learnt any wooden man, then I can only presume you have never learnt, or even met, any 'masters' of Wing Chun? :eek:.

What is means is that he (along with pretty much most full contact fighters) understand that the wooden dummy training really doesn't do much for fighting skill.

Any WC "master" who is good at fighting is good at fighting not because of his Mook Jong training, but, instead, in spite of that training.

[sanjuro_ronin]

What is means is that he (along with pretty much most full contact fighters) understand that the wooden dummy training really doesn't do much for fighting skill.

Any WC "master" who is good at fighting is good at fighting not because of his Mook Jong training, but, instead, in spite of that training.

I wouldn't say "in spite of" that training.
I will say this though, wooden dummy the way it is typically done is the furthest thing from fighting or developing fighting skill.
Most guys do the wooden dummy in such a weak way that they are getting nothing out of it.

[goju]

i like some of the stuff ive seen jerry poteet do on the wc dummy

he apparently unloads on it as a result of seeing the way bruce lee would work the dummy

[Frost]

i like some of the stuff ive seen jerry poteet do on the wc dummy

he apparently unloads on it as a result of seeing the way bruce lee would work the dummy

well i suppose someone had to like his stuff eventually:eek:

[goju]

well i suppose someone had to like his stuff eventually:eek:


hey he is as stiff as a mummy but his stuff still good!

unless theres others stuff of his i havent seen:D

[sanjuro_ronin]

The dummy is a great tool, but it is not fighting nor ever can be,obviosuly.
But it should be approuched in a manner as close to fighting as possible.
The dummy can be used for conditioning purposes, so it must be hit and hard, eventually.
It can be used to test structure and and alignment, but it must be hit, hard.
While it CAN be used in a regimented and prearranged sequence, I think that facet should be dropped as soon as the routine becomes "understood".
Of course non-WC people that use the dummy don't need a routine at all.

[Knifefighter]

The dummy is a great tool, but it is not fighting nor ever can be,obviosuly.
But it should be approuched in a manner as close to fighting as possible.
The dummy can be used for conditioning purposes, so it must be hit and hard, eventually.
It can be used to test structure and and alignment, but it must be hit, hard.
While it CAN be used in a regimented and prearranged sequence, I think that facet should be dropped as soon as the routine becomes "understood".
Of course non-WC people that use the dummy don't need a routine at all.

If the dummy was a great tool, at least one other style would have picked up and added something similar by now. There is a reason that not one single full contact style (from wrestling to judo to sambo to bjj to boxing to muay thai to kickboxing) has anything similar to the Mook Jong. The closest you might come to using a Mook Jong in another style would be a grappling dummy and most people know you don't get much out of working with those.

[goju]

If the dummy was a great tool, at least one other style would have picked up and added something similar by now. There is a reason that not one single full contact style (from wrestling to judo to sambo to bjj to boxing to muay thai to kickboxing) has anything similar to the Mook Jong. The closest you might come to using a Mook Jong in another style would be a grappling dummy and most people know you don't get much out of working with those.

choy lay fut is supposed to have a history of producing competitors and they have their wooden dummy

[YungChun]

If the dummy was a great tool, at least one other style would have picked up and added something similar by now. There is a reason that not one single full contact style (from wrestling to judo to sambo to bjj to boxing to muay thai to kickboxing) has anything similar to the Mook Jong. The closest you might come to using a Mook Jong in another style would be a grappling dummy and most people know you don't get much out of working with those.

Boxing et al are not close range bridging arts like SCMA and VT are... Thus no need for such an implement..

Still, Boxing in the old days (bare knuckle) looked in some ways very similar to VT.. And clearly it worked well for them given the rule set of the day...

[sanjuro_ronin]

If the dummy was a great tool, at least one other style would have picked up and added something similar by now. There is a reason that not one single full contact style (from wrestling to judo to sambo to bjj to boxing to muay thai to kickboxing) has anything similar to the Mook Jong. The closest you might come to using a Mook Jong in another style would be a grappling dummy and most people know you don't get much out of working with those.

Its A tool and like any tool, you get what you put into it.
I don't like grappling dummies too much, but I LOVE throwing dummies, its a great workout !

[Knifefighter]

Boxing et al are not close range bridging arts like SCMA and VT are... Thus no need for such an implement..

Still, Boxing in the old days (bare knuckle) looked in some ways very similar to VT.. And clearly it worked well for them given the rule set of the day...

LOL @ boxing not being close range. Boxing is all ranges except the ground.

[YungChun]

LOL @ boxing not being close range. Boxing is all ranges except the ground.

LOL at the strawman...

It's not a bridging art.... Or perhaps you don't know what that means...:rolleyes:

[Knifefighter]

LOL at the strawman...

It's not a bridging art.... Or perhaps you don't know what that means...:rolleyes:

Is wrestling a bridging art?

[Ultimatewingchun]

It sounds to me like you don't want to go someplace and lose without having your, "buddies" there to uphold your honor.

You say that you are not that good on the one hand and now you are telling people essentially, that you would get nothing out of sparring WC guys because they aren't up to your standard.

***THIS is an old, old story with Terence Niehoff. His version of the shell game. But the truth should be obvious by now: there's very little fighting skill to be found under the shell he does inhabit.

Which has to be hidden at all costs.

[wkmark]

To me, Ving Tsun has it's usefulness on the street and that's all i really care about. But to say that it is a COMPLETE system, I am not sure I agree 100%. Ving Tsun is a skill, a skill that you need to develop for yourself. It has it's limitations and knowing Ving Tsun will not turn you into Superman. It's always good to Cross Test it with other styles so that you know what the limitations are and how to adjust it for yourself. But to cross train in other arts (meaning learning Ving Tsun and learning Grappling all at the same time), unless you have the time and money and you want to be a MMA fighter, by all means go for it.

However I am married with wife and kids, i don't think i can spare that much time to cross train in other arts if i want to remain married and be able to share the upbringing of my kids. Ving Tsun is great for what I what to achieve and that is to hold my own or survive in scuffles either in a bar or a random street fight. Note the word SURVIVE. I am not gonna pick a fight with a 200 LB MMA built and skilled fighter and if I get attacked by one on the street, the only thing i can do is do my best to survive so I can still go home. If a 200 LB MMA fighter come to challenge me to a Death fight in a ring, (note the word DEATH) then by all means, I will throw in the white towel and admit you are better. If you are challenging me to a ring match, sure i don't mind If we both agree that you won't kill me. HAHA. It's just a way for me to test out the my skill in Ving Tsun, but before I get in the ring with you, I will be sure to train my butt off.

People need to understand that learning to fight on the street and learning to fight in a ring are both totally different things. I heard of a story once that Sifu Wong Shung Leung was out in a street fight with a TKD expert. In that fight Sifu checked the surroundings of the area and noticed that there were a couple steps behind the TKD expert. All he did was charge in towards the fighter at the beginning and then the TKD didn't notice the steps and fell backwards down the stairs. The fight was over in less than 30 seconds. If the fight was in a ring, thing may be different. The moral of the story is that knowing how to street fight via checking the environment, surroundings and learning how to fight in the RING are 2 different things. At least this is my view. I am sure you may agree or disagree.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Is wrestling a bridging art?

Yep.
The wooden dummy is an exotic training tool and it is fun to use.
I can see how a "armed" bag would be of some use for MT and Wrestling and even MMA, but I don't think they need it.
The dummy is a tool to be used in solitary training, MT, grappling systems and such, are NOT trained in that way, they are trained in a gym with a partner.
The dummy is not needed and could even be a hinderence.

[LoneTiger108]

What you are talking about is CONDITIONING, not skills. Running is great dor developing your cardio, but it isn't fighting skill./

I'll give props to ya T as I kinda knew you would use the word 'conditioning'. But I can't agree that the wooden man can ONLY be used for conditioning. Decent, purposeful wooden man training is a skill unto itself IMHO.


I have learned the dummy form, thank you. It does not develop fighting skill -- you can't develop fighting skill by NOT fighting. Just like you can't develop swimming skill by NOT swimming.

Then I agree to disagree. Learning correct posture, alignment, speed and power have nothing to do with the skill of fighting? :confused:


What is means is that he (along with pretty much most full contact fighters) understand that the wooden dummy training really doesn't do much for fighting skill.

Any WC "master" who is good at fighting is good at fighting not because of his Mook Jong training, but, instead, in spite of that training.

There are natural fighters, I understand that, but if you haven't experienced the benefits of wooden man training you just don't know what you're missing. Where else can such accuracy be trained for the Wing Chun fighter?

It's specifically a Wing Chun thing. And I would hazard a guess that people who have not seen its use or benefits for the fighter unfortunately have not learnt how to utilize this tool.

The 108/116 didn't just get thrown together overnight, and IMO the form shouldn't even be taught without learning your basic ON the wooden man first.

[WCFighter]

Hi everyone,

Yes.. every style has limitations.
When you really look at a martial art style... it is really a single toolbox with many tools inside (techniques, strategies, blocks, attacks)

It solves different problems, but it is unrealistic to believe it can solve ALL problems.

So.. either look into your existing toolbox, and try to figure out how to use
your existing toolset to solve the new problem at hand (go as high in your lineage to get the solution (or other lineage in your respective style)), OR go get a new toolset (different style) with its own tools to solve your problem at hand.

In the end, you will have a toolshed ( your total skills ) containing different toolboxes (skills from a specific style), each containing different tools.


Someone wrote:
"If you used wing chun in a street fight and won, then the other guy wasn't very good"

I don't agree with the above statement.

Like UltimateWingChun said: "Depends on person and their training".

I have been training in TWC for 16 years, and I find that it is amazing for
a stand up striking system.

To me... wing chun has more than just rolling arms chi sao... we have hand strikes and kicks and footwork, blocks that work great against other fighters of different styles.

If you are trying to fight another style using your double arm rolling... you are gonna get creamed... this is just a wing chun specific chess game..

Chi sao should only occur if you are obstructed from your target, or your arms happen to clash with your opponent and you need to work around them. At that point you use tiny fragments of chi sao to get out of that situation, and then you resume your striking.

If you have an open target, hit them with your fist or foot. If there isn't an opening create one with pak sao / punch or larp/sao punch, for example.


Before TWC, I took Karate for several years as a young teenager, then White Crane for 2.5 years as an older teenager. I liked Karate, it was aggressive. I really liked White Crane, because it was more aggressive and fluid, and used evasion and phoenix eyes strikes. Even though both taught blocks, I found it hard to actually succeed in blocking... mind you... I was not an instructor in either of these styles..... Everyone basically traded blows... very little blocking. When I became somewhat accomplished in TWC, I could block WAY more reliably, and I don't resort in trading blows... I was taught to control their lead arm as I come in with my attacks.... Control/Hit , Control/Hit .

I was no longer trading blows.. I was coming in for attack with a better strategy than I was taught in the previous styles I took.

So... in my opinion... I feel blessed to have come across wing chun.

If you're not having success with it, you probably aren't training realistically (only doing rolling arms isn't realistic training by the way), OR
you haven't given yourself enough time to get really good at it.


P.S. Other styles that intrigue me but don't have time to learn...

White Crane, Praying Mantis, Arnis, BJJ

(Just because I think they are cool, doesn't mean wing chun
is lacking anything... I appreciate them for what they are... just
as cool as wing chun )

[SAAMAG]

Good post man.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I'll give props to ya T as I kinda knew you would use the word 'conditioning'. But I can't agree that the wooden man can ONLY be used for conditioning. Decent, purposeful wooden man training is a skill unto itself IMHO." (LoneTiger108)

***KEEP in mind, Tiger...that when no one has ever explained to you what moves and sequences in the WD can be used how, and in what fighting scenarios - then naturally you're going to THINK that the wooden man can ONLY be used for conditioning.

[Ultimatewingchun]

And I second Vankuen...

that was a good post, WCFighter.

[Knifefighter]

To me... wing chun has more than just rolling arms chi sao... we have hand strikes and kicks and footwork, blocks that work great against other fighters of different styles.

Please post some clips of you going full-contact against these other styles.

Or are you just extrapolating about what you think you would use against these other styles?

[YungChun]

Please post some clips of you going full-contact against these other styles.

Or are you just extrapolating about what you think you would use against these other styles?


I'm sure he meant 'highly effective' against other theoretical non-fighting styles, where VT really kicks azz!!! :D:cool::p:o

[Ultimatewingchun]

Please post some clips of you going full-contact against these other styles.

Or are you just extrapolating about what you think you would use against these other styles?

***LOOK HERE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzlDFKNoJ2M

[Knifefighter]

***LOOK HERE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzlDFKNoJ2M

So, are we all in agreement about those being a good examples of WC being used in a full contact environment?

And if so, are there any examples where takedowns are also part of the ruleset?

[Ultimatewingchun]

here's another one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb9-KSC1fPQ&feature=related

[WCFighter]

Guys....

If you don't think wing chun is any good ... then for heaven's sake go train in something else.. OK?

I don't need to post videos of myself fighting other stylists to prove any point.
I don't need to defend the wing chun system; there are great fighters out there.

I didn't call myself a kung fu god.
I didn't say "I" was invincible, or wing chun is "invincible". I simply said that I am able to block "my gates: left right, top middle, bottom" more reliably because of the wing chun system. And that I can attack more intelligently, and without resorting to trading blows when I do so.

In the end.. all styles punch and kick, and it doesn't matter what their style is IF you know how to protect your gates, and you know how to maneuver around and attack a human being.

As a stand up system, it is up there will the other great stand up systems.


On a side note, it takes courage to go into UFC, and hard work, but a lot of time I see these guys unable to block punches or kicks... they just take it in the face.. They practice "Iron Face".
And I think they are foolish not to learn some kind of blocking skills. Western boxing isn't enough for stand up fighting in the octagon.
And there's nothing that a meathead/Iron Face UFC fighter knows that I would want to learn from him in terms of stand up fighting...
If the fighter is an accomplished ground fighter, and has the high level designation in his field, then I would consider taking lessons from this guy.
In terms of conditioning my body, I WOULD take advice from a UFC fighter who has done it


In the end, people who are unable to block well, are sitting ducks in my opinion.

My goal in wing chun was to become a "handful", not an easy target...someone that is NOT a sitting duck .

So that if someone tried to do something to me, they would maybe later say "Hmm... yeah..., that guy was harder to attack or take down than I thought, and it was quite painful. I won't try to do that again"

[Knifefighter]

Guys....

If you don't think wing chun is any good ... then for heaven's sake go train in something else.. OK?

I don't need to post videos of myself fighting other stylists to prove any point.
I don't need to defend the wing chun system; there are great fighters out there.

I didn't call myself a kung fu god.
I didn't say "I" was invincible, or wing chun is "invincible". I simply said that I am able to block "my gates: left right, top middle, bottom" more reliably because of the wing chun system. And that I can attack more intelligently, and without resorting to trading blows when I do so.

In the end.. all styles punch and kick, and it doesn't matter what their style is IF you know how to protect your gates, and you know how to maneuver around and attack a human being.

As a stand up system, it is up there will the other great stand up systems.


On a side note, it takes courage to go into UFC, and hard work, but a lot of time I see these guys unable to block punches or kicks... they just take it in the face.. They practice "Iron Face".
And I think they are foolish not to learn some kind of blocking skills. Western boxing isn't enough for stand up fighting in the octagon.
And there's nothing that a meathead/Iron Face UFC fighter knows that I would want to learn from him in terms of stand up fighting...
If the fighter is an accomplished ground fighter, and has the high level designation in his field, then I would consider taking lessons from this guy.
In terms of conditioning my body, I WOULD take advice from a UFC fighter who has done it


In the end, people who are unable to block well, are sitting ducks in my opinion.

My goal in wing chun was to become a "handful", not an easy target...someone that is NOT a sitting duck .

So that if someone tried to do something to me, they would maybe later say "Hmm... yeah..., that guy was harder to attack or take down than I thought, and it was quite painful. I won't try to do that again"

More than likely they would be thinking, "Wow, I sure crushed that guy with no problem at all."

The fact is you pretty much prove you are a theoretical non-fighter by your statements above.

You think you could block better than pro MMA fighters? Then get out there and show us. But, of course, you have nothing to "prove". Yet you have to enough to prove that you have to post that you can do it, but they are somehow inferior to you in that regard.

Guys like you have been getting their asses handed to them by real fighters since time immemorial.

[SAAMAG]

Awww touched a nerve did he? Lol.

Don't get so bent outta shape Dale. Let people talk. If it works for him great. Though everyone gets hit...no matter what the skill level a person is. It's just a fact of fighting.

[WCFighter]

Vankuen is right. Everyone gets hit, regardless of style.

Western boxers don't really block, they take hits by covering their ears with their forearms.

How about this... watch 100 UFC fights, and count the number of times somebody actually blocks a punch/kick ( And by block... I don't mean covering your ears with your forearms...). And then count the number of times someone consistently takes a hit to the head or body because they have no concept or strategy for blocking...

You will find the latter to be statistically the highest.

When I watch the UFC, it is "once in a blue moon" that I see someone block something.

There are definately great ground fighters in the UFC for sure, but I am hardly ever impressed by their stand up. If their goal is to repeatedly get hit in the face and eventually get brain damage, then they are on the right track.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Vankuen is right. Everyone gets hit, regardless of style.

Western boxers don't really block, they take hits by covering their ears with their forearms.

How about this... watch 100 UFC fights, and count the number of times somebody actually blocks a punch/kick ( And by block... I don't mean covering your ears with your forearms...). And then count the number of times someone consistently takes a hit to the head or body because they have no concept or strategy for blocking...

You will find the latter to be statistically the highest.

When I watch the UFC, it is "once in a blue moon" that I see someone block something.

There are definately great ground fighters in the UFC for sure, but I am hardly ever impressed by their stand up. If their goal is to repeatedly get hit in the face and eventually get brain damage, then they are on the right track.

...And here come the apologists.

[HumbleWCGuy]

More than likely they would be thinking, "Wow, I sure crushed that guy with no problem at all."

The fact is you pretty much prove you are a theoretical non-fighter by your statements above.

You think you could block better than pro MMA fighters? Then get out there and show us. But, of course, you have nothing to "prove". Yet you have to enough to prove that you have to post that you can do it, but they are somehow inferior to you in that regard.

Guys like you have been getting their asses handed to them by real fighters since time immemorial.

It's not about blocking better than a pro-fighter it's about having a better command of blocking than another style in an evenly matched fight. WC lineages that do more distance training are better blockers than their counterparts in other arts. Where some WCers fall short is that they are lacking in other areas needed to be successful.

[Knifefighter]

...And here come the apologists.

No, actually, here's comes the... "give us an example of a WC guy fighting in an MMA event who has better defense."

Of course you can't do that.

So, then, how about getting out there and showing us yourself.

'Oh, wait a minute, you can't do that either.

But you can criticize the guys who ARE out there doing it as if what they are doing is somehow inferior to the examples you can never give any evidence for actually being in existence.

[Knifefighter]

It's not about blocking better than a pro-fighter it's about having a better command of blocking than another style in an evenly matched fight. WC lineages that do more distance training are better blockers than their counterparts in other arts. Where some WCers fall short is that they are lacking in other areas needed to be successful.

Oh, WC practitioners can block, but they can't do any of the other things is takes to be a decent fighter.

OK

[Frost]

Guys....

If you don't think wing chun is any good ... then for heaven's sake go train in something else.. OK?

I don't need to post videos of myself fighting other stylists to prove any point.
I don't need to defend the wing chun system; there are great fighters out there.

I didn't call myself a kung fu god.
I didn't say "I" was invincible, or wing chun is "invincible". I simply said that I am able to block "my gates: left right, top middle, bottom" more reliably because of the wing chun system. And that I can attack more intelligently, and without resorting to trading blows when I do so.

In the end.. all styles punch and kick, and it doesn't matter what their style is IF you know how to protect your gates, and you know how to maneuver around and attack a human being.

As a stand up system, it is up there will the other great stand up systems.


On a side note, it takes courage to go into UFC, and hard work, but a lot of time I see these guys unable to block punches or kicks... they just take it in the face.. They practice "Iron Face".
And I think they are foolish not to learn some kind of blocking skills. Western boxing isn't enough for stand up fighting in the octagon.
And there's nothing that a meathead/Iron Face UFC fighter knows that I would want to learn from him in terms of stand up fighting...
If the fighter is an accomplished ground fighter, and has the high level designation in his field, then I would consider taking lessons from this guy.
In terms of conditioning my body, I WOULD take advice from a UFC fighter who has done it


In the end, people who are unable to block well, are sitting ducks in my opinion.

My goal in wing chun was to become a "handful", not an easy target...someone that is NOT a sitting duck .

So that if someone tried to do something to me, they would maybe later say "Hmm... yeah..., that guy was harder to attack or take down than I thought, and it was quite painful. I won't try to do that again"

really its up there with all the other great stand up arts and has produced great fighters...thats the problem people say this but cant prove it. where are the video tapes of all these great fighters holding their own against good thai, boxing and sanshou guys?

the problem with wing chun (and tcma in general) is guys like you saying these pro fighters are sitting ducks etc and don't know how to do this or that and that your wing chun helps you fight more intelligently etc...but never stepping up and actually doing it or even being able to put up a video of anyone doing what you are talking against a competent fighter

[Frost]

Vankuen is right. Everyone gets hit, regardless of style.

Western boxers don't really block, they take hits by covering their ears with their forearms.

How about this... watch 100 UFC fights, and count the number of times somebody actually blocks a punch/kick ( And by block... I don't mean covering your ears with your forearms...). And then count the number of times someone consistently takes a hit to the head or body because they have no concept or strategy for blocking...

You will find the latter to be statistically the highest.

When I watch the UFC, it is "once in a blue moon" that I see someone block something.

There are definately great ground fighters in the UFC for sure, but I am hardly ever impressed by their stand up. If their goal is to repeatedly get hit in the face and eventually get brain damage, then they are on the right track.

there is a reason you don't see them try to block anything apart from covering and trying to evade, its because blocking is so low percentage its not worth doing, with small gloves and power punches you either evade or cover....watch the early ufc where traditional guys with no clue tried to block punches, teeth were flying ever where

of course you could always enter the next ufc and show us all how its done since your level of stand up is so much better LMAO

[Frost]

...And here come the apologists.

why be apologists, he made such a stupid as$ statement that i am surprised you are agreeing with him

[HumbleWCGuy]

why be apologists, he made such a stupid as$ statement that i am surprised you are agreeing with him

I wasn't agreeing. I just assumed that it would spark a debate about how good mma strikers are.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Oh, WC practitioners can block, but they can't do any of the other things is takes to be a decent fighter.

OK

Wing Chun isn't about "blocking" anyway exactly. It seems that there are two approaches to WC. There is the more mobile strategy as with my system where "blocking" has nothing to do with it. Everything is about footwork, staying on the outside gate of the opponent and counter fighting. It's about measuring distance and position relative to an opponent. Good strikers are already executing such strategies, albeit not WC trained. When a WCer gets it in his mind that WC is a blocking art, all is lost as my instructor was fond of saying. IMO, a perfect example of bad WC is being in a fight, being immobile, blocking a few punches before being overwhelmed because of not being able to handle a head-on full-contact exchange because it goes against everything that mobile WCers are trained to do.

[Frost]

I wasn't agreeing. I just assumed that it would spark a debate about how good mma strikers are.

to be fair he also mentioned boxers in this statement so we can also argue about how good boxers and kickboxers are at striking:)

[YungChun]

Wing Chun isn't about "blocking" anyway exactly. It seems that there are two approaches to WC. There is the more mobile strategy as with my system where "blocking" has nothing to do with it. Everything is about footwork, staying on the outside gate of the opponent and counter fighting. It's about measuring distance and position relative to an opponent. Good strikers are already executing such strategies, albeit not WC trained. When a WCer gets it in his mind that WC is a blocking art, all is lost as my instructor was fond of saying. IMO, a perfect example of bad WC is being in a fight, being immobile, blocking a few punches before being overwhelmed because of not being able to handle a head-on full-contact exchange because it goes against everything that mobile WCers are trained to do.

Boxers do "block" or parry, the rear hand is often seen doing this... Sometimes you'll even see them counter soon after...

So where are all those simultaneous block/strikes many buy into in VT?

In any case any passive move is a bad move.. Blocking with no offensive component is a passive move.

When I was sparring I would simply look for any and all opportunities to force a bridge, normally by focusing simply on attack..

VT IMO may end up "blocking" but it may be a result of a failed bridge attempt. Whatever VT does it should attempt to convert to offense with any move it does..

I also see a lack of real power as a major deficiency in many VT folks.. If schools were more concerned with some of the basics, power, mobility, VT entry tactics, leg attacks, and a few simple inside techniques and actually fighting most of these problems would go away IMO.

Actually I think everyone should check out Alan Orr's Videos.. Aside from the MMA elements he has some very good core VT basics that folks can use to check and assist their VT.. At the very least you can compare and contrast what you do with what he is focusing on.

[HumbleWCGuy]

VT IMO may end up "blocking" but it may be a result of a failed bridge attempt. Whatever VT does it should attempt to convert to offense with any move it does..

I also see a lack of real power as a major deficiency in many VT folks.. If schools were more concerned with some of the basics, power, mobility, VT entry tactics, leg attacks, and a few simple inside techniques and actually fighting most of these problems would go away IMO.
.

I agree. on both counts.

[SAAMAG]

Western boxers don't really block, they take hits by covering their ears with their forearms...
...When I watch the UFC, it is "once in a blue moon" that I see someone block something.


The simple reason is that the traditional (karate/tkd/etc) blocking method isn't fast enough to be effective against combinations. The head covers, slap parries, and sinking elbows for the body had a higher percentage of success in actual combat.

At least that's something I learned going from Karate/TKD to Muay Thai/Boxing as a kid. But I found if I "augmented" my karate style blocks to be more of a cover they worked far better. Granted they weren't doing the damage (as blocks are supposed to be strikes as well) they did protect.

"Reaching" to meet an attack is a bad idea when there are several linked attacks coming at you at different speeds, power levels, elevations, and various targets.


It's not about blocking better than a pro-fighter it's about having a better command of blocking than another style in an evenly matched fight. WC lineages that do more distance training are better blockers than their counterparts in other arts. Where some WCers fall short is that they are lacking in other areas needed to be successful.

The Duncan Leung line works this a lot more than most. You should check into them (Alan Lee's guys)



But you can criticize the guys who ARE out there doing it as if what they are doing is somehow inferior to the examples you can never give any evidence for actually being in existence.
Well technically he's criticizing the fact they aren't doing it with their arms but are instead doing it with their faces. And there's evidence of that all over the place. HOWEVER...IMO one can't really criticize to that unless they've been tested to that degree and experienced WHY that happens (i.e. fighting better skilled people, fatigue, etc).


Wing Chun isn't about "blocking" anyway exactly. It seems that there are two approaches to WC. There is the more mobile strategy [B]as with my system where "blocking" has nothing to do with it. Everything is about footwork, staying on the outside gate of the opponent and counter fighting. It's about measuring distance and position relative to an opponent. Good strikers are already executing such strategies, albeit not WC trained. When a WCer gets it in his mind that WC is a blocking art, all is lost as my instructor was fond of saying. IMO, a perfect example of bad WC is being in a fight, being immobile, blocking a few punches before being overwhelmed because of not being able to handle a head-on full-contact exchange because it goes against everything that mobile WCers are trained to do.

I never really knew there was two approaches to wing chun. Staying on the outside is something I've never heard of with wing chun, as its mainstay was the fact that it was a close-range fighting system. If you're staying on the outside--there are much better methods to get the job done there.

[WCFighter]

I am not apologizing for anything.

I think WC is worthwhile, and it works for me, and lots of other people I know.

I think all the WC-haters should leave this forum, and go join some other forum.

[goju]

.watch the early ufc where traditional guys with no clue tried to block punches, teeth were flying ever where




yeah this isnt true there werent people whipping out kung fu blocks left and right on the early ufc:p:rolleyes::D

[goju]

The simple reason is that the traditional (karate/tkd/etc) blocking method isn't fast enough to be effective against combinations. The head covers, slap parries, and sinking elbows for the body had a higher percentage of success in actual combat.
i cant speak for the rest of tma but karate and tkd defintely have those type of "Shielding" blocks you see boxers and mma guys do

http://www.cdn.sherdog.com/_images/pictures/20090518061537_IMG_7121.JPG

http://urdirt.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/imagens71.JPG

[YungChun]

i cant speak for the rest of tma but karate and tkd defintely have those type of "Shielding" blocks you see boxers and mma guys do

http://www.cdn.sherdog.com/_images/pictures/20090518061537_IMG_7121.JPG

A rising block is not a boxing cover...

Any passive block or cover is a lost beat.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Remember, the majority of blocks were applied VS grabs/attempted grabs and not VS kicks.
TMA always tended to advocate the evade/counter ( at the same time if possible) rather than the "block-strike" stuff.
Many blocks in Kata were strikes and not always blocks.

[goju]

that wasnt a rising block

this is one

http://www.iowkarate.co.uk/communities/4/004/007/172/144/images/4529480478.jpg

[YungChun]

that wasnt a rising block

this is one

http://www.iowkarate.co.uk/communities/4/004/007/172/144/images/4529480478.jpg

Okay well it's impossible to know the actual action used in a still.. However, the only structural difference is one is a knife hand (open) and the other is a fist.. The elbow and forearm position appear close enough to show that both are blocks, albeit one a rising knife hand.. In either case they are not what I, or most would call a boxing cover..

[YungChun]

Remember, the majority of blocks were applied VS grabs/attempted grabs and not VS kicks.
TMA always tended to advocate the evade/counter ( at the same time if possible) rather than the "block-strike" stuff.
Many blocks in Kata were strikes and not always blocks.

My understanding of the blocks in karate is that they should break structure, similar to actions used in VT.. It's when they are done in ways which don't break structure and hand chase instead that they really begin to fall down IMO..

The best block I ever learned in Karate was something we called a reverse punch.. :D

[sanjuro_ronin]

My understanding of the blocks in karate is that they should break structure, similar to actions used in VT.. It's when they are done in ways which don't break structure and hand chase instead that they really begin to fall down IMO..

The best block I ever learned in Karate was something we called a reverse punch.. :D

Correct, blocks are designed to attack the structure of the oncoming limb and/or body.
Blocks VS strikes are always tricky and reactive, that is why they tend to work better vs grabs.
I guy throwing a punch at you at 30 mph from 3ft away will always put you a "step Behind" unless your reaction time is amazing or your "block" is pre-emptive.
grabs come much slower.

[goju]

Okay well it's impossible to know the actual action used in a still.. However, the only structural difference is one is a knife hand (open) and the other is a fist.. The elbow and forearm position appear close enough to show that both are blocks, albeit one a rising knife hand.. In either case they are not what I, or most would call a boxing cover..


yeah theyll some times call it "answering the phone" in boxing he was rasing his hand up in that manner

hiki toshi uke, kuri uke, yoko kosa uke, jodan moreote uke are alos shielding blocks

[YungChun]

Correct, blocks are designed to attack the structure of the oncoming limb and/or body.
Blocks VS strikes are always tricky and reactive, that is why they tend to work better vs grabs.
I guy throwing a punch at you at 30 mph from 3ft away will always put you a "step Behind" unless your reaction time is amazing or your "block" is pre-emptive.
grabs come much slower.

One karate guy I worked with years ago showed me how he used a rising block.. What he would do is essentially step in as the opponent attacked deflect the incoming, and hit him with the rising block fist under the opponent's chin.... Quite a block he had.. :eek:

[chusauli]

That's a good block! And completely agree the reverse punch is the best block.

Nakayama often did sliding strikes from his Uke.

Most of the old Okinawan masters simply do a small Tai Sabaki and punch, or because of their Sanchin training, allow you to strike them, to strike you.

If WCK does block, it is largely too slow, unless you add on and slow down the reaction time of the opponent. You can accomplish that through making their balance lost, injuring them with your "block", completely turning your opponent around, or jamming/smothering their attack immediately. All else is inefficient, as you allow them to strike again.

[sanjuro_ronin]

One karate guy I worked with years ago showed me how he used a rising block.. What he would do is essentially step in as the opponent attacked deflect the incoming, and hit him with the rising block fist under the opponent's chin.... Quite a block he had.. :eek:

Most bunkai and himitsu ( hidden hand) rising blocks in katas are forearm or fist strikes.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Blocking IS very difficult to do if you don't really see what's coming...or you do, but it's too late.

And of all the things I have ever learned from William Cheung (and there have been many)...if I could only take one thing with me to the desert island, it would be "where to look" when facing your opponent.

I've seen a lot in my days - but I've never seen anybody quite like him in this regard.

By watching elbows and knees...which move slower than hands and feet - because they travel a shorter amount of distance than hands and feet - but in the same amount of time...and therefore have to be moving slower...

you can see what's coming in time to react appropriately - including blocking.

And then there are the DIFFERENTIATION DRILLS that William Cheung teaches: You stand in front of someone watching their elbows and knees...and they throw all kinds of attacks at you...

and you must keep your visual and mental focus going....and make appropriate responses....blocks, parries, redirects, side steps, counter strikes, etc.

[chusauli]

I used to do the watching elbows and knees thing for a while, but found that, for me, to be inefficient and slow. But this is only my opinion. Opinions vary, and I'm not saying it isn't valid for others.

I simply now gaze at the chest, and any movement of the sternum tells me everything.

If it turns left or right, a punch or a hook is coming.

If it rises, then drops sharply, an overhand is coming.

If it dips low, then goes upward, an uppercut is coming.

If the torso drops and rotates, a round kick is coming, and so on...you can drill with various partners and learn to intercept their movement.

Watching 4 things is too much; watching one thing is enough.

[Knifefighter]

I used to do the watching elbows and knees thing for a while, but found that, for me, to be inefficient and slow. But this is only my opinion. Opinions vary, and I'm not saying it isn't valid for others.

I simply now gaze at the chest, and any movement of the sternum tells me everything.

If it turns left or right, a punch or a hook is coming.

If it rises, then drops sharply, an overhand is coming.

If it dips low, then goes upward, an uppercut is coming.

If the torso drops and rotates, a round kick is coming, and so on...you can drill with various partners and learn to intercept their movement.

Watching 4 things is too much; watching one thing is enough.

If I remember correctly, the studies show the most effective "view" is a diffuse focus on the center of the body.

Makes sense considering the fact that our peripheral vision allows us to pick up greater varieties of motions coming from different areas. Basically, the more you focus, the less you see of the factors that are outside of that focus.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Makes sense considering the fact that our peripheral vision allows us to pick up greater varieties of motions coming from different areas. Basically, the more you focus, the less you see of the factors that are outside of that focus."
...............................

***AND WILLIAM CHEUNG makes the same argument as part of why his method works. You watch the lead elbow with direct vision - but with peripheral vision you connect your visual/mental focus to the rest of the body by something else he does.

From a non contact distance, you're watching the lead elbow directly because his lead hand is the closest weapon he has to threaten you with, and will get there faster than anything else. So you give his lead arm the most respect by looking at it directly.

But from the non contact range, what you also do is draw a line in your mind's eye that leads from his lead elbow diagonally down towards his rear knee. And it is this line that gets followed with your peripheral vision.

So the whole body is being scoped simultaneously - with an emphasis on his closest weapon.

Now let's say a kick starts to come from that rear leg...

you will pick this up with your peripheral vision - and immediately switch your direct focus to the rear knee itself...since because it moves slower than the foot - for reasons already given - it can be seen better.

And from that you can determine very quickly if the kick is straight, is it round, is it high, is it low, etc...

Now once you make contact with the guy limb-to-limb (bridge)....let's say your right arm/hand/forearm has contacted his left arm...at that point you immediately switch your direct focus to his other elbow...since that one is completely free - and you want information about it...

while your right arm - through the contact reflexes developed in chi sao...is gathering information about the arm it's contacted - including the possibility that he might disengage that arm entirely.

There's a whole science to this that William Cheung has developed...and it can definitely take some time to develop the ability to use this method effectively - including the differentiation drills that he teaches as part of the process.

So I'm not surprised to hear that the basic method didn't really work for Robert, as I've heard that from a number of people who may have attended just a few seminars of William Cheung's; or perhaps didn't train in a TWC school after being introduced to the method; or who attended a TWC school wherein the instructor didn't emphasis this type of training.

But this much I can tell you: the method works.

And btw, if he has no lead arm showing - you watch the midpoint of his body directly until he starts to move a limb...and then you find the elbow (or knee) of that limb with direct vision.

Take a look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D93hwx8P9So

[SAAMAG]

Agreed with those on the center body / peripheral view. I found after a while that's what I would find myself doing when sparring bc i had a wider view of what the opponent was doing. Similar to how motorcyclists view the road using a "wide angle lens" to catch movement around their focal point.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Watch the "v neck". LOL !
When you "focus" on the upper chest/end of the neck area, you get a clear picture of movement, whatever happens, that area ALWAYS moves.
A nice basic guideling is taught in Pekiti-tirsia kali where the shoulders are the "boundries", anything coming from the outside of our shoulders is treated by moving IN, anything coming INSIDE the shoulder is treated by moving out,forward and to the side.
It's a good base to start from that downplays the "what is he gonna do" factor.

[t_niehoff]

***AND WILLIAM CHEUNG makes the same argument as part of why his method works. You watch the lead elbow with direct vision - but with peripheral vision you connect your visual/mental focus to the rest of the body by something else he does.


Therein lies the problem -- people using argument to validate what they believe works in fighting.

Instead of listening to people with very little proven fighting skills, let's look at what proven experts do and say -- what top level boxers, kickboxers, etc. do. Funny, but just standard boxing, kickboxing training, that doesn't focus on watching the elbows/knees, has consistently produced good results, including world class fighters. Whereas the elbow watchers . . . .



From a non contact distance, you're watching the lead elbow directly because his lead hand is the closest weapon he has to threaten you with, and will get there faster than anything else. So you give his lead arm the most respect by looking at it directly.


Good outside fighters (boxing, MT, etc.) generally teach to watch the opponent's body not his hand (or elbow) since at distance he has to step (move his body), and how he steps/moves will tell you what is coming. This is why good outside fighters are able to use evasive footwork. On the outside, you are responding to his body movement with your body movement -- that's the game on the outside. As they say, the hand is faster than the eye. But the body isn't.

Of course, this is just a general guide, you really learn what to watch from sparring. This is just a part of tactical awareness, and you develop your tactical awareness by and through sparring.



But from the non contact range, what you also do is draw a line in your mind's eye that leads from his lead elbow diagonally down towards his rear knee. And it is this line that gets followed with your peripheral vision.


Oh yeah! Imaginary lines are always useful! ;)



So the whole body is being scoped simultaneously - with an emphasis on his closest weapon.

Now let's say a kick starts to come from that rear leg...

you will pick this up with your peripheral vision - and immediately switch your direct focus to the rear knee itself...since because it moves slower than the foot - for reasons already given - it can be seen better.

And from that you can determine very quickly if the kick is straight, is it round, is it high, is it low, etc...


Good fighters (and most people when really being aggressive) don't START throwing anything from outside (from out of range) - although it can appear so (since their opponent steps as they step). They step in FIRST then throw, so that they are in range when they launch. If you launch from outside as you come in, you are telegraphing, your strike has to travel much further, giving your opponent time to react and you are more committed (and so more easily countered).

When someone is IN RANGE when they begin to throw a strike, all your theory goes out the window.



Now once you make contact with the guy limb-to-limb (bridge)....let's say your right arm/hand/forearm has contacted his left arm...at that point you immediately switch your direct focus to his other elbow...since that one is completely free - and you want information about it...

while your right arm - through the contact reflexes developed in chi sao...is gathering information about the arm it's contacted - including the possibility that he might disengage that arm entirely.


Things are not this simplistic.



There's a whole science to this that William Cheung has developed...and it can definitely take some time to develop the ability to use this method effectively - including the differentiation drills that he teaches as part of the process.

So I'm not surprised to hear that the basic method didn't really work for Robert, as I've heard that from a number of people who may have attended just a few seminars of William Cheung's; or perhaps didn't train in a TWC school after being introduced to the method; or who attended a TWC school wherein the instructor didn't emphasis this type of training.

But this much I can tell you: the method works.


Just that no one can show it working against any decent fighters.