For those styles that emphasize the centre line (and bridging)

[Frost]

Ok I could have posted this in the southern or wing chun forums (well maybe not the wing chun forum lol) but I wanted to ask how have those of you that train a style that is predominantly concerned with attacking and defending the centre line (which usually goes hand in hand with some form of bridge/sticking work) adapted or changed your style to take into account that most modern confrontations in the west are with people who do not prescribed to the centre line theory (don’t seek or put out a bridge) and are more likely to be throwing hooks, upper cuts and overhands than attacks down the centre? And are more likely to clinch and hit/throw than trap and stick?

Before anyone in general (or someone in particular mentioning no names herre….) says real TCMA does not need to change and has it all I do know that southern styles have gone through this process in the past: That when the lama guys were winning their challenges matches in the south styles like the village hung gar changed a lot to take into account the new long hand strikes and the total lack of a bridge to work off (indeed hung gar and CLF actually adopted a lot of these strikes into their systems) so I was wondering what other styles were doing to take into account the modern environment?

And if you aren’t changing the style are you and have you changed how you train and who you train against? For example its one thing to say we train to defend against hooks and overhands thrown by class colleagues who have never boxed or done a long hand style but quite another to bring in a boxer, CLF or kick boxer to train against.

How do you ensure your guys are prepared for modern strikers? I know some hakka and southern arts were taught after one already had a grasp on a longer range style, learning bakmei or dragon after getting a grounding in hung gar or CLF for example, do schools still do this and if so would you encourage your students to get a grounding in CLF, boxing or Thai before training in a more specialized art form?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Anytime a person engages you, they create a "bridge", whether a physical one or one of "intent".
But while in the past a "REAL" bridge ( physical connection) meant an exchange of blows or trapping, nowadays it will mean:
Clinching with or without hitting which begets"
Grappling, which begets:
Take downs, which begets
Ground work.

The options are to address said "begetting" or to ignore it and hop it goes away.

When following the practical view of addressing it, we have the option to adopt or adapt or both.

[mickey]

sanjuro ronin,

BINGO!!!



mickey

[dimethylsea]

I would think that the "bridge" or center line concept is really not the first link in the chain.


The first link in the chain is to attack first (ideally) and do it on a straight line to their head or something else juicy on the center line of their body. Only if they block that somehow do you start working the "bridge".

So against someone who "yields the center" and attacks from the side (like boxing hooks or what have you) then the real solution (if you want to stay inside a tighthand bridge/center line style of fighting) is to attack more aggressively up the center. It is worth mentioning this will be a dreamy (in the sense of one getting KOed) experience if you haven't got the chin or ability to cover/absorb those hard hooks and what all to your cranium and/or chin.

Basically if you try to "to and fro kickbox" with a shorthand bridging style I'd think you are already missing the point.

The point of that shorthand bridging stuff is to attack first and KO them so fast they never get the chance to attack from the side. You attack so fast the only thing they can do to avoid the KO is to get their hands up on their center line and contend with you there. And then you have all the fancy centerline/trapping type stuff to deal with THAT eventuality.

If they start from far enough out that they pop off first I'd suggest jettisoning the "tighthand/center line stuff" and just driving in to clinch where you can use short-range trapping stuff like elbows.

My .02$.

[TenTigers]

even when I studied WCK, they trained to attack the centerline and then go to the blindside, flanking them. Centerline is where you direct your attacks, but to stand there on the inside and try to play from there, to me is insanity.
In SPM, we go in straight to attack the attack, but we really cut angles.
Why face all his guns?

[sanjuro_ronin]

The center line is about OURS not theirs.
Like TT said, flan them ( blind side) so that all your weapons can hit them but only a very limited amount of offense and defense can be used by the opponent.
Nothing new or unique to Southern systems, it is common in almost all forms of H2H fighting.

[Yum Cha]

Pak Mei uses centerline stuff, but also other vectors.

Its hard to add to what's been said, I'm actually impressed at how insightful the answers are, but I don't think it satisfies you?

Where I think its not making sense to you is that these concepts, and their practice is so 'tick-tock-tick-tock' that you can't see how they apply under stress, as they are quite easily out-played in those little games we play with friends.

A bridge is anything from a trap/grab/lock, to a feint that just causes the opponent to lift a guard 2 inches. And, it is dynamic, as soon as you build you cross it and abandon it for the next one.

If you use TCAM short arm boxing, and you can't move laterally, you are in a world of hurt.

I think of it a lot like foil vs sabre in sword fighting.

I think of that vid awhile back, I think it was Crocops brother, the Russian with all the tats, vs some giant hult type guy, spitting and snotting in his corner before the bout?

He came rushing the Russian, who sidestepped, tipped him once to get him off balance, and then delivered the groceries. Not saying it was centreline, per se, but a good example of how it works in reality.

And another technical point.

Some people load, they pull back an arm to punch. Lots of short armed fighters, don't load, they spring forward only, but integrate additional power to make up for it, usually capturing body weight. Less power, quicker strike.

There are range games too, with a Short Arm fighter, the hands are held forward, maybe 75%? Other styles hold their arms back, maybe extended 30%. (Standard college wrestling defense, low, arms out. Its not that far a leap if you tighten up a bit.... )

If you are good enough, you can use the speed to win. But, like I said, its not the style, its the man. Its the same western principle as setting up with a jab, and following up with a slab of concrete...so nothing mythical about it, just an alternative method to solve a problem.

The most difficult part of it all for me, is crossing the no-man's-land of kicking and long arm attacks, into the range I want. You have to do it while the opponent has expended their loaded energy, thus, the 'attack the attack' concept.

[bawang]

i never heard of centerline and brdiging until i heard it from guangdong kung fu people. for longfist i learned about keep your hands up and protect your face and stomach.

for northern kung fu u either slap or roll the punch or duck. i still dont know what exactly is bridging.

i dont understand wing chun center line since your temples and ears and kidneys are on the side. when you cant defend a hook punch you have a problem.

[David Jamieson]

Anytime a person engages you, they create a "bridge", whether a physical one or one of "intent".
*snip*.

^^^^^^^^^


*snip* i still dont know what exactly is bridging.

The more you know

[bawang]

why dont u just call it attacking

[EarthDragon]

mantis loves fighting styles with centerline attacks, we use an angular stepping pattern to slip the the side as TT and others said, then attack right to defend the left and attack left to defned the right.

If blocked you can continue your angular step to move behind your opponent and continue attacking high then use the foot, chopping behind the knee to bring your opponent down.

bawang, bridign can be used as defense as well, perhaps thatsw why it is not just called attacking, you can bridge to neutralize as well.

[YouKnowWho]

i never heard of centerline and brdiging until i heard it from guangdong kung fu people. for longfist i learned about keep your hands up and protect your face and stomach.
The general TCMA uses the term "front door and side doors" instead of the "center line".

TCMA emphasizes on "fight to be inside and don't fight to be outside", and "fight to be on top and don't fight to be on the bottom." When you hold both hands together and make your arms to form a wedge, you will protect your head and chest from all straight punches. Your front door (center line) is closed. Since your opponent can only use hook punches to hit you (attack your side doors), you can use "挂(Gua) - comb hair" on both sides of your head and deflect both of your opponent's punches and then move in with a head lock or overhook. IMO, protecting your center line is the same as "close your front door and invite your opponent to come through your side door".

[goju]

a good way to protect the centerline is to spend time punching and kicking your opponent so they dont have time to attack it lol

if no bridge is given in the sense most are thinking than just punch him :D

[David Jamieson]

why dont u just call it attacking

or engaging.

It's not my term, it is used as a concept that leads to learning about all the different types of bridging and how to deal with x or y or z.

attacking can be done impersonally from a distance with a projectile weapon...so no bridge required. :)

[Yum Cha]

i dont understand wing chun center line since your temples and ears and kidneys are on the side. when you cant defend a hook punch you have a problem.

Yea, I think that is the issue, in a nutshell..

[Yum Cha]

The general TCMA uses the term "front door and side doors" instead of the "center line".


That's how we look at it, center, right and left, up and down.

Same triangular stepping as ED and TT mentioned for Mantis.

Good CLF is pretty mobile too.

A bridge, in long arm, might be a swinging arm against another arm, breaking a defense to open the door for the second swing.

Something else, short arm combinations (and others I'm sure) are alot about getting an expected reaction to build a combination on. If the bridge works, you follow it, if not, you re-group. The bridge may be benign, but it generates a reaction nevertheless and that's the set-up. In itself, its not a panacea, it still comes down to the man.

And, its not universal, its one element of fighting skill, a strategy, not the only strategy.

[YouKnowWho]

i dont understand wing chun center line since your temples and ears and kidneys are on the side. when you cant defend a hook punch you have a problem.

A hook punch is much easier to block than a straight punch. You don't want to move in when your opponent uses straight punch at you. You want to move in when your opponent uses hook punch at you.

[bawang]

a lot of northern kung fu have guarding three levels. head stomach legs three levels its veyry simple. i think maybe people did wing chun and bring their bias into other styles

[EarthDragon]

we have 8 cardinal points which we live by when fighting I have shared them before and will again for all, these are like the sonnets or poems of said style and keep in mind if you use these principles to master, fighting just became much easier

1. Continuous movement with each technique giving birth to the next.
2. Close the enemy using the long hand then destroy the enemy at close range with the
short hand.
3. Attack high to open the low area and attack low to open the high area.
4. When attacking left defend the right, when attacking right defend the left.
5. Attack and defend simultaneously since all actions are neither exclusively offensive
nor defensive.
6. Actions must be natural and reflexive, don’t think act.
7. Stay relaxed and change the stepping pattern.
8. In action there is stillness, in stillness there is action.
e these to the point of instinct, fighting becomes much easier to master

[Lee Chiang Po]

Ok I could have posted this in the southern or wing chun forums (well maybe not the wing chun forum lol) but I wanted to ask how have those of you that train a style that is predominantly concerned with attacking and defending the centre line (which usually goes hand in hand with some form of bridge/sticking work) adapted or changed your style to take into account that most modern confrontations in the west are with people who do not prescribed to the centre line theory (don’t seek or put out a bridge) and are more likely to be throwing hooks, upper cuts and overhands than attacks down the centre? And are more likely to clinch and hit/throw than trap and stick?

Before anyone in general (or someone in particular mentioning no names herre….) says real TCMA does not need to change and has it all I do know that southern styles have gone through this process in the past: That when the lama guys were winning their challenges matches in the south styles like the village hung gar changed a lot to take into account the new long hand strikes and the total lack of a bridge to work off (indeed hung gar and CLF actually adopted a lot of these strikes into their systems) so I was wondering what other styles were doing to take into account the modern environment?

And if you aren’t changing the style are you and have you changed how you train and who you train against? For example its one thing to say we train to defend against hooks and overhands thrown by class colleagues who have never boxed or done a long hand style but quite another to bring in a boxer, CLF or kick boxer to train against.

How do you ensure your guys are prepared for modern strikers? I know some hakka and southern arts were taught after one already had a grasp on a longer range style, learning bakmei or dragon after getting a grounding in hung gar or CLF for example, do schools still do this and if so would you encourage your students to get a grounding in CLF, boxing or Thai before training in a more specialized art form?

It is usually more difficult to fight against someone that has the same skills as you. WC is designed to fight against people trained or untrained, in other fighting styles. It works much better against people that do not know what WC is. In fact, on the street, you are not likely to ever meet up with someone that is trained in your specific fighting system. And that would include MMA styles. Unless of course you spend your time looking for them or hanging out in front of kwoons and dojo's. In that case there is really no hope for you. When these discussions get heated up everyone talks like anyone you meet is going to be a strong ground fighter, but that is not usually the case. On the ground most people that are not trained in some form of wrestling or jiu Jitsu are all in the same boat.

[YouKnowWho]

4. When attacking left defend the right, when attacking right defend the left.
When you attack left, you "invite" your opponent to come in throught your right. It's a trap.

[B.Tunks]

Bring in boxers, kickboxers and thai boxers to fight against.

[B.Tunks]

For those that are keen to compete - enter sanda, kickboxing, thai, freestyle or MMA events.

[Yum Cha]

Bring in boxers, kickboxers and thai boxers to fight against.

Indeed, best option. Train against what you are likely to face, not against just your own style.

You find out what they have weakness with, and you find yours. Make sure you remember your weaknesses, and what surprises them as well.

The error is in giving up your game to play theirs instead of learning how to apply your stuff. And yea, its filthy hard.

[B.Tunks]

And yea, its filthy hard.

Yep. So be prepared to get bashed. A lot.

[Yum Cha]

Yep. So be prepared to get bashed. A lot.

Yea, that's the learning process. I prefer a few intense fights to regular light sparring because it keeps the edge. It always hurts.

[mooyingmantis]

The error is in giving up your game to play theirs instead of learning how to apply your stuff.

A gem in only one sentence! :)

[YouKnowWho]

The error is in giving up your game to play theirs instead of learning how to apply your stuff.
You should always fight the way that you want to fight and not the way that your opponent wants you to fight.

We should not exchange punches with a boxer. We should try to extend the fighting range or shorter it. The "distance management" is a very important part of the combat skill. Both the long range kick and the close range clinching are the best counters for the short range punch. A front kick can stop your opponent from coming closer. A head lock can disable your opponent's punching ability.

[bawang]

We should not exchange punches with a boxer.
i disagree mang. chinese boxing should go toe to toe with a boxer raise our standards.

in kung fu movies the villain is always the big strong angry guy and the good guy always small and skinny like a womans. in reality kung fu fights like the big bad guy.
wing chun doesnt real

[David Jamieson]

So, what techniques are in your chosen style do you train, and see as employable against the attacks of each category of fighter as you know them?

example being:

the boxer: hands and good footwork, likely does a lot of head hunting, but are surprising when they go low as well.

the thai boxer: capable of kicks, punches, knees, forearm and elbow smashes, clinching and in some cases throwing. Known to have very strong and cutting kicks usually aimed at defeating your legs but are as effective at targeting anywhere on the body.

the Grappler: will move in fast, play close and diminish your striking abilities at range while moving to tangle you up, take a limb or put you out, or at least render you incapable of doing what you need to do.

the mmaist: a little of column a and a little of column b. trains in conditioning and stamina, a lot. Probably a lot more than you do. nyah. lol. However, when properly trained, is comfortable in striking, kicking, grabbing, throwing and grappling. All ranges are trained despite perhaps having weaknesses in one or the other.

the karateka: Depending on what this person got themselves into as far as their personal karate goes, and I'm talking outside the realm of Shotokan here, this can consist of a lot of different things and can include throws. Conditioning is a big deal in the best styles, imnsho. :o Punches and Kicks are the meat and potatoes of it.

the taekwondo-ist: ITF have good kicks, not much in the way of punching. WTF: is the proverbial noodle boxing. If there was Korean wushu, this is it. :p

the fma-ist: Hey, it's not cool to bring knives and sticks into this. Do you remember any of that burmese boxing your uncle showed you? :D

the jtf2 member: You were already dead at the beginning of this list

[YouKnowWho]

i disagree mang. chinese boxing should go toe to toe with a boxer raise our standards.
When I said that you should not exchange punches with a boxer, I'm not assuming that your punching skill is inferior to a boxer, but the boxer is weak in other areas such as kicks, locks, and throws. It may save you a lot of effort if you just use your low round hose kick to keep hitting on your boxer opponent's leg until he can't stand on his feet any more.

[David Jamieson]

When I said that you should not exchange punches with a boxer, I'm not assuming that your punching skill is inferior to a boxer, but the boxer is weak in other areas such as kicks, locks, and throws. It may save you a lot of effort if you just use your low round hose kick to keep hitting on your boxer opponent's leg until he can't stand on his feet any more.

That a boxer doesn't train to throw or kick doesn't presume that he cannot defend against them and still launch his attacks. So, boxing a boxer is to play his game, but he won't stop playing it, plus dealing with your attacks. Presuming he is somewhat athletic and therefore has some stamina. I would think it would probably be good to face a boxer with simple techniques that don't involve trying to out box him. So, yes kicks to the legs and push kicks to the middle would be useful as well. To really render the boxer undone, you do have to take him down.

that's how I would see it.

[YouKnowWho]

To really render the boxer undone, you do have to take him down.

As long as you try not to stay in punching range, extend that range or shorter the range are all good ideas.

[David Jamieson]

As long as you try not to stay in punching range, extend that range or shorter the range are all good ideas.

extending the range makes the fight longer with a boxer, if you go in tight, make a throw and go from there i think that would work in combination with kicks. My hands I would use to keep my head covered a lot. lol :p

[bawang]

When I said that you should not exchange punches with a boxer, I'm not assuming that your punching skill is inferior to a boxer, but the boxer is weak in other areas such as kicks, locks, and throws. It may save you a lot of effort if you just use your low round hose kick to keep hitting on your boxer opponent's leg until he can't stand on his feet any more.

mang a boxer only boxes because thats the rules of his sport. u spar or fight him to learn and improve not to beat him and feel good or prove somting mang. throwing a boxer doesnt mean anything if a boxer doesnt know throwing.

[YouKnowWho]

I think we are talking about training vs. combat (life and death situation).

[bawang]

for life and death situation use a gun man. in traditional kung fu thats called flash the green.

[Frost]

Pak Mei uses centerline stuff, but also other vectors.

Its hard to add to what's been said, I'm actually impressed at how insightful the answers are, but I don't think it satisfies you?

Where I think its not making sense to you is that these concepts, and their practice is so 'tick-tock-tick-tock' that you can't see how they apply under stress, as they are quite easily out-played in those little games we play with friends.

A bridge is anything from a trap/grab/lock, to a feint that just causes the opponent to lift a guard 2 inches. And, it is dynamic, as soon as you build you cross it and abandon it for the next one.

If you use TCAM short arm boxing, and you can't move laterally, you are in a world of hurt.

I think of it a lot like foil vs sabre in sword fighting.

I think of that vid awhile back, I think it was Crocops brother, the Russian with all the tats, vs some giant hult type guy, spitting and snotting in his corner before the bout?

He came rushing the Russian, who sidestepped, tipped him once to get him off balance, and then delivered the groceries. Not saying it was centreline, per se, but a good example of how it works in reality.

And another technical point.

Some people load, they pull back an arm to punch. Lots of short armed fighters, don't load, they spring forward only, but integrate additional power to make up for it, usually capturing body weight. Less power, quicker strike.

There are range games too, with a Short Arm fighter, the hands are held forward, maybe 75%? Other styles hold their arms back, maybe extended 30%. (Standard college wrestling defense, low, arms out. Its not that far a leap if you tighten up a bit.... )

If you are good enough, you can use the speed to win. But, like I said, its not the style, its the man. Its the same western principle as setting up with a jab, and following up with a slab of concrete...so nothing mythical about it, just an alternative method to solve a problem.

The most difficult part of it all for me, is crossing the no-man's-land of kicking and long arm attacks, into the range I want. You have to do it while the opponent has expended their loaded energy, thus, the 'attack the attack' concept.

nd I should point out although I am reply to Yum Cha not all the post is directed at him I just cant be bothered to reply to every single good post there are too many!) and actually confirm some of my thinking on the subject, my view of the short hand styles is that they were developed for a very specific environment and a very specific enemy, one who practised a similar art which also emphasised controlling and defending the centre line and delivering short hand strikes and I was interested to see how people where adapting what they did to suit the new environment, the way some hung gar dealt with the effectiveness of the long arm stuff by bringing them into their style wholesale has always intrigued me, and I was wondering how styles were dealing with an environment where clinching was the norm.

I am fairly sure that bak mei, southern dragon, wing chun etc don’t have clinching (at least as it is used now) and weren’t designed to face clinching in the way it is used now: And I was interested in how people were learning to cope with AND use the thai clinch, a single neck tie, under hooks, using the shoulder to create space to strike, using a frame on your opponent to strike off etc, staying in that range to strike whilst having to deal with someone shooting and looking for a take down etc…its one thing to say a bridge can be anything but quite another to actually modify your training to work with these new types of bridging and attacks….are these things that have always been in your style if not are these things that you are learning to deal with and how is it changing your short hand work?

Likewise I was interested to hear how people are dealing with strikers who didn’t hang out all the time at close range but used footwork and longer range striking and on the inside use hooks and upper cuts, I liked the comment someone made about bringing in boxers and thai guys to work against, too often I have seen and witnessed people teaching how to deal with longer strikes and kicks where there is no lateral movement or setting up of the kicks and where they teach defences against hooks without even knowing how to throw a proper hook or how to set it up and how to follow it up, its embarrassing

Saying we simply move in aggressively and keep striking to make them cover up and allow us to get to the range we want is not always the answer, good boxers are used to dealing with pressure and don’t just cover up, they move and hit and more than once I have eaten an upper cut or short hook trying this, its something you only learn by facing a good boxer and taking the hits lol

I also agree with not fighting your opponents fight but attacking his weaknesses, but as already pointed out by other posters you have to actually work with these people to understand what their weaknesses are: saying cover and enter behind a hook is a great idea until you meet a boxer why like to uppercut off his hook or a thai guy work like to follow it with a knee, saying just kick a boxer also sounds great but in practise they have great footwork and body movement and its not that easy to do, and they learn to couner a leg kick with a right cross very quickly

Thanks all for the good answer and comments

[sanjuro_ronin]

Indeed, best option. Train against what you are likely to face, not against just your own style.

You find out what they have weakness with, and you find yours. Make sure you remember your weaknesses, and what surprises them as well.

The error is in giving up your game to play theirs instead of learning how to apply your stuff. And yea, its filthy hard.

So many people feel threatened that their MA doe snot have the solution to a particular riddle and that means they must, for some reason, give up their MA and take up MMA or BJJ or whatever.
This is nonsense.
Like I said before and you picked up, we adapt and adopt, that doesn't mean we stop doing X system, we just modify it, evolve accordingly, just like it has ALWAYS been done in the past and always will be done in the future.

By exposing yourself to "the other guys", you lean what works, what doesn't, what needs to be modified and what can be scrapped.

Your final product may not look like what it was 100 years ago, but that is a GOOD thing.
We don't drive the same cars or ride the same bikes that they did 100 years ago either.

[David Jamieson]

for life and death situation use a gun man. in traditional kung fu thats called flash the green.

Do you have a gun? As a Canadian, I can tell you that a gun for self defense is not actually an option available to you. You can't even have a gun that is declared for "home protection".

You have one highly interpretable law around "use of justifiable force" that if you do not have rock solid witnesses to affirm that the shooting was justified, then forget it.

So, while that is an option in some states, it is not an option in Canada and a great deal many other places in the world.

Just pointing it out.

[TenTigers]

Sanjuro has hit the nail on the head. Your Gung-Fu should be a living, breathing, EVOLVING art. Otherwise, it is dead. If you are doing the exact same thing they have done a hundred years ago, heck, if you are doing the same thing you've been doing ONE year ago, then you haven't grown or evolved.
If the tactics fighters are using have changed, then you need to evolve and adapt to the changes.
I teach the same forms, but many drills have been modified, with new applications to the same moves.
Ex: Our form has A scooping catch to the opponent's kick, which is now is modified in drills with footwork and body angle to absorb and catch the Muay Thai round kick.
In order to counter a technique, you first must need to understand the technique.
This entails more than simply watching someone do it on youtube, it means bringing in a practitioner ofrom that system and learning exactly how, why, and when the technique is thrown, and how they counter it. after all, who knows how to counter a technique better than the person who does it?
After that, you can then work it into your framework, applying your style's principles..if that's what you want.
That is why I bring in Muay Thai, grappling, throwing, boxing guys to my school.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sanjuro has hit the nail on the head. Your Gung-Fu should be a living, breathing, EVOLVING art. Otherwise, it is dead. If you are doing the exact same thing they have done a hundred years ago, heck, if you are doing the same thing you've been doing ONE year ago, then you haven't grown or evolved.
If the tactics fighters are using have changed, then you need to evolve and adapt to the changes.
I teach the same forms, but many drills have been modified, with new applications to the same moves.
Ex: Our form has A scooping catch to the opponent's kick, which is now is modified in drills with footwork and body angle to absorb and catch the Muay Thai round kick.
In order to counter a technique, you first must need to understand the technique.
This entails more than simply watching someone do it on youtube, it means bringing in a practitioner ofrom that system and learning exactly how, why, and when the technique is thrown, and how they counter it. after all, who knows how to counter a technique better than the person who does it?
After that, you can then work it into your framework, applying your style's principles..if that's what you want.
That is why I bring in Muay Thai, grappling, throwing, boxing guys to my school.

And that is why in the old days, masters would travel and challenge other systems.
We no longer need to do that because we have risen above petty "lineage" crap and "****stylisim", well, the smart ones anyways.
We now openly exchange and train with fellow MA for the betterment of ourselves and our systems.

I knew there was a reason I always liked Rik.

[TenTigers]

I knew there was a reason I always liked Rik.
it's the hair, dude. Chicks dig the hair...

[bawang]

Do you have a gun? As a Canadian, I can tell you that a gun for self defense is not actually an option available to you. You can't even have a gun that is declared for "home protection".

You have one highly interpretable law around "use of justifiable force" that if you do not have rock solid witnesses to affirm that the shooting was justified, then forget it.

So, while that is an option in some states, it is not an option in Canada and a great deal many other places in the world.

Just pointing it out.

i no have gun, and since im in small town now i dont carry anything. this is a college town and its very peaceful. i was just saying traditional kung fu use weapons for self defence and has concepts about knifes and firearm for a longtime. in the north a blade traditionally is called green and a gun is called a black donkey.

[kungfoozer]

mang a boxer only boxes because thats the rules of his sport. u spar or fight him to learn and improve not to beat him and feel good or prove somting mang. throwing a boxer doesnt mean anything if a boxer doesnt know throwing.

I agree with this. In a fight obviously you play to your own strengths over an opponents. In an all out sparring match you would do the same. But if you are sparring a boxer I think it is unfair to insert other methods such as wrestling. A boxer cannot fall properly. Obviously a wrestler(for example) may not have the boxing skills of a boxer so he is at a disadvantage. Therefore it is only fair to have two sparring match, on where the rules of are just striking(for the boxer's benefit) and one where take downs are allowed. And then a final one where anything is allowed if both are trying to develop skills in all areas. The boxer would need to learn basic fall skills for this to happen.

[SPJ]

a lot of people are thinking about your and the opponent's centerline

you may make your center line disappear by using your one side to face the opponent

some of the real WC theory is actually about occupation of the center route/road

WC want to take up the road to the opponent's center line, qu zhong lu

Ba gua, on the other hand is to walk away to the side but approach the centerline from the side

xie chu zhen ru.

tai chi is about circling with forearms and controlling the opponent's arms

may take up the center of the opponent's position, but not necessarily strike the center line

---

[Golden Arms]

As I learned in my hung training, bridging covers situations and ranges from the intangible (feints/ghost bridging), all the way into the clinch (the bread and butter of many of our bridge methods takes place while disrupting the structure of a clinching opponent for example).

Perhaps the issue is not with the arts, but with the "teachers" that are not fighters teaching people how to fight. In my view that is unethical, but I don't speak for anyone except for myself.