2 punches and 3 kicks

[deejaye72]

how many techniques do we really need? i am using bill wallace as an example( sorry i am a fan) with 2 punches and 3 kicks bill wallace became middle weight kickboxing champion, he said with only those 2 punches and 3 kicks he could hit you from 178 different angles!

makes me think about some of things jesse glover talks about, he always says you just need a handful of techniques, and make them your own! which was bruce lee's idea.

the other interesting fact, is bill wallace was influenced by skipper mullins, he wanted to do what skipper did with his right leg with his left leg. skipper mullins was influenced and had lessons from none other than bruce lee!

wing chun doesnt have to be complicated, there are only so many things that work in a fight anyway, make them your own train from all angles, you got it made.

[trubblman]

Makes me think about some of things jesse glover talks about, he always says you just need a handful of techniques, and make them your own! which was bruce lee's idea.



Bruce had a lot of ideas but la lot of them including this was not his. He just said it. But the idea is hundreds of years old.

[Dragonzbane76]

simplisity is the answer in my book. If you truly master a tech and that is all you do I would say most likely in a situation you will triumph. Old saying "I don't fear the man whom has 100 techniques, I fear the man whom has one technique that he has mastered a 100 times." Or something along those lines.

occam's razor-the simplist answer is usually the best.

[deejaye72]

Bruce had a lot of ideas but la lot of them including this was not his. He just said it. But the idea is hundreds of years old.


my point was his influence, he was very influencial, and very much so for the individuals i mentioned, but i am sure its an old concept

[Robinhood]

It has to be automatic, if you try to respond with thinking you will be to late.

[YouKnowWho]

In spear fight, when you stab your spear at your opponent's chest, your opponent can use his spear to make a small circle to deflect your spear head away from his chest. You can pull your spear back and stab again, or you can borrow your opponent's spinning force, spin your spear along with your opponent's spear, and still stab at his chest.

When you make a straight punch, your opponent can block (deflect) your punch from all different directions. If you can use your arm like a spear, spin your arm with your opponent's block (deflect), you can still continue your striking. To make your "straight" punch circular and to make your "circular" punch straight will require a lot of training.

The straight punch in the XingYi system is called "转环崩(Zhuan Huan Beng) - Circular Beng Chuan". Old Chinese saying said, "崩拳有九(Beng Quan You Jiu) - A straight punch can be changed into 9 different ways". If your opponent blocks (deflects) your straight punch, you can change your straight punch into:

- hook punch,
- back fist,
- spiral punch,
- elbow strike,
- ...

[Phil Redmond]

Bruce had a lot of ideas but la lot of them including this was not his. He just said it. But the idea is hundreds of years old.
You beat me to it. That concept is way older that Bruce. The idea is that under pressure you won't be able to draw on complicated techniques due to sensory deprivation. All you need is a technique/counter against a straight attack and a round attack and a good kick.

[Lee Chiang Po]

One of my favorite and the one that seems to work almost every time goes like this. I sort of attempt a backhand at the face. The natural response is to try to block it with the same side hand. My actual intention is to grab that wrist and jerk it toward me and at the same time pull him across my front, or to his other side. As this is happening I place my other hand on his shoulder and add to the force of turning him to the side. As he is now off balance he can not really resist. I then place a foot into the back of his knee and shove him down to his knees. From there I could apply any number of attacks. I know it seems too simple, but it works so well because it is so simple. Now, if you jump back and square off at him, this is not going to work at all for you. It becomes a fight at that point.
I am a sneaky fighter. I do not like to stand off and trade punches with anyone. Odds are that you are going to get hit. It is foolish to think any amount of gung fu is going to make you bullet proof. You have to take it seriously.
I am a firm believer that a small number of very simple moves that are trained to perfection is what is going to keep you going. In fact, Wing Chun is actually based on this concept.

[dirtyrat]

The straight punch in the XingYi system is called "转环崩(Zhuan Huan Beng) - Circular Beng Chuan". Old Chinese saying said, "崩拳有九(Beng Quan You Jiu) - A straight punch can be changed into 9 different ways". If your opponent blocks (deflects) your straight punch, you can change your straight punch into:

- hook punch,
- back fist,
- spiral punch,
- elbow strike,
- ...

hey, i know how to count! that's only four.... ;)

[YouKnowWho]

hey, i know how to count! that's only four.... ;)
I'm sure our fourn members here can figure out the other 5.

Let's try this. How many ways can you change your "hook punch" into?

[GlennR]

how many techniques do we really need? i am using bill wallace as an example( sorry i am a fan) with 2 punches and 3 kicks bill wallace became middle weight kickboxing champion, he said with only those 2 punches and 3 kicks he could hit you from 178 different angles!

makes me think about some of things jesse glover talks about, he always says you just need a handful of techniques, and make them your own! which was bruce lee's idea.

the other interesting fact, is bill wallace was influenced by skipper mullins, he wanted to do what skipper did with his right leg with his left leg. skipper mullins was influenced and had lessons from none other than bruce lee!

wing chun doesnt have to be complicated, there are only so many things that work in a fight anyway, make them your own train from all angles, you got it made.

Thais have been doing this for generations

[Wu Wei Wu]

you only need one technique. the problem is finding which 'one,' (dependant on the opponent).

let the (conceptual framework of a) fight dictate how and what you train. let the opponent dictate how you hit him.

suki

[deejaye72]

i am glad it turned into a good discussion, i am a big fan of bill wallace because of my dad, he saw him fight in the 70's and said he was amazing! he won the fight with a left leg to the opponents face, it was so fast the officials didnt know what kind of kick it was, they had to replay the tape and found out it was a roundhouse kick lol

the simplicity of his style is what is interesting, but just boxing in general is pretty simple jab,cross hook,uppercut and overhand and look how effective it is, as far as hand techniques it dominates mma.

my dad boxed in gleasons gym in the 80's and after all the years of martial arts he said the sparring was incredible, they punish you lol. he said the physical training was also hardcore, and after six months he was in the best shape of his life.

[anerlich]

i am glad it turned into a good discussion,

Sure, if the number of platitudinous quotes is a yardstick.

You might be able to get by with one technique ... though in practice nobody does.

What you also need to know is how to deal with all the counters and reactions your opponent might have to that technique.

Since we're talking stories, St Bruce, etc. there's an old karate story about a challenger who came to town. Living there were a guy with a terrific punch, another guy with a fabulous kick, and another guy who practiced a lot. "He's a good teacher," the populace said, somewhat dismissively. Long story short, the challenger easily dealt with the atomic puncher and thermonuclear kicker. The last guy beat him with a wider reportoire. "I'm glad I was beaten by someone who had mastered the basics," the vanquished challenger wasw heard to say.

Just a story? sure. So is most of the rest of the "discussion".

[imperialtaichi]

you only need one technique. the problem is finding which 'one,' (dependant on the opponent).

let the (conceptual framework of a) fight dictate how and what you train. let the opponent dictate how you hit him.

suki

You cannot predetermine what the opponent is going to use on the street. Your techniques cannot be opponent dependent; although I do agree training under a certain conceptual framework, which dictates the purpose of our training.

[deejaye72]

Sure, if the number of platitudinousquotes is a yardstick.

You might be able to get by with one technique ... though in practice nobody does.

What you also need to know is how to deal with all the counters and reactions your opponent might have to that technique.

Since we're talking stories, St Bruce, etc. there's an old karate story about a challenger who came to town. Living there were a guy with a terrific punch, another guy with a fabulous kick, and another guy who practiced a lot. "He's a good teacher," the populace said, somewhat dismissively. Long story short, the challenger easily dealt with the atomic puncher and thermonuclear kicker. The last guy beat him with a wider reportoire. "I'm glad I was beaten by someone who had mastered the basics," the vanquished challenger wasw heard to say.

Just a story? sure. So is most of the rest of the "discussion".

sorry my little useless stories dont mean a thing to you! if you didnt like the thread dont comment!!

hears another story, my mother told me if i didnt have anything nice to say, keep my mouth shut lol:D

[deejaye72]

[QUOTE=anerlich;1145427]Sure, if the number of platitudinous quotes is a yardstick.

You might be able to get by with one technique ... though in practice nobody does.

ok, well then how many techniques do you think you need to master? why do you think we are taught to drive with one foot? how many of these techniques do you think we can pull off in a self defense situation?

sorry about my parables, i was trying to make a point, i guess i wasnt very clear. maybe, rhetoric will work lol:) i truly believe in hicks law,as i have been in some messed up situations and too many choices are not good.:confused:

maybe i am doing everything wrong i dunno:(

[YouKnowWho]

you only need one technique. the problem is finding which 'one,' (dependant on the opponent).

In order to be good in one technique, you have to be good in 20 other techniques at the same time. It's like a general will need many solders to be around him. For example, if you want to be good in "head lock", you also have to be good in "over hook" too.

There are 16 different ways to apply your "single leg". Knowing just 1 way may be good enought to use it against a beginner. It may not be enough if your opponent is about your level.

[deejaye72]

In order to be good in one technique, you have to be good in 20 other techniques. If you want to be good in "head lock", you also have to be good in "over hook" too.

well, do you think overtime we just evolve the basics so much from training, that now we have a half dozen techniques instead of the 3 or 4 we started with?

[Wu Wei Wu]

Perhaps the easier way for me to put it, is this;

You only need one technique - the problem is, this is determined by the opponent! As a result you have to have a repertoire of skills that range the full gamut of how fights play out. Once the broad range of skill is there, it is fine to refine it by whittling it down.

Suki

[YouKnowWho]

well, do you think overtime we just evolve the basics so much from training, that now we have a half dozen techniques instead of the 3 or 4 we started with?

A technique is like the root of a tree. It will soon grow into a tree that has many brenches and leafs. For example, a simple "hook punch" can be changed into:

- head lock,
- reverse head lock (guillotine),
- shoulder lock,
- under hook,
- shoulder press,
- arm lift,
- arm pull,
- waist surround,
- bear hug,
- elbow strike,
- ...

A "hook punch" can be changed into more than 10 different techniques. You will never know which technique it will change into. It depends on your opponent's response. If you are not good in those changes, the opportunity may present to you but you won't be able to grab it.

[anerlich]

sorry my little useless stories dont mean a thing to you! if you didnt like the thread dont comment!!

hears another story, my mother told me

She probably told you to suck it up and not whine when someone disagreed with you, too. But you only seem to want to hear positives,so you probably tuned out.

There are reasons why most MA styles do not rely on single techniques. Why WC doesn't have just bil, but also bon.

One of my instructors told me the lack of a reasonable spectrum of techniques is one of the hallmarks of the perpetual beginner.

since we're name dropping, Geoff Thompson, whose credibility matches or exceeds most others mentioned so far, indicates the right cross is his favourite and principal weapon. But he also says you still require a foundation in the basics of an art, and he continues to crosstrain in a wide variety of striking and grappling arts.

You might have a plan A, but you'd better have a plan B as well.

[deejaye72]

[QUOTE=anerlich;1145702]She probably told you to suck it up and not whine when someone disagreed with you, too. But you only seem to want to hear positives,so you probably tuned out.

see i knew you liked me!!!:)

well then thats where chi sao reflexes would help, flowing from one technique to the next seamlessly!! would you not agree?

[deejaye72]

[QUOTE=anerlich;1145702]She probably told you to suck it up and not whine when someone disagreed with you, too. But you only seem to want to hear positives,so you probably tuned out.

There are reasons why most MA styles do not rely on single techniques. Why WC doesn't have just bil, but also bon.

yep, 2 punches 3 kicks, 178 differerent angles!:D