Countering the hook punch

[LaRoux]

Here are the three proven methods for countering hook punches. Two are shown in the first clip and one is shown in the second clip. You can see ample evidence for these three techniques being used in real time in numerous boxing, Muay Thai, and MMA matches.

Striking (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iE8qA_Gcn8)

Grappling (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LnQS_pXzpI)

[Hendrik]

A Wing Chun way

Start 9.30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3hLnXD8SlA

Watch out for the body has to be able to take the bounce or recoil otherwise one will disintegrate. It is not just as simple as hitting center....with technic etc. That is dealing with momentum and not living in a momentum vacuum world.

[LaRoux]

A Wing Chun way

Start 9.30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3hLnXD8SlA

Watch out for the body has to be able to take the bounce or recoil otherwise one will disintegrate. It is not just as simple as hitting center....with technic etc. That is dealing with momentum and not living in a momentum vacuum world.

That way will get you KTFO with the other side hook.

There's a reason you won't see that being done by people who are actually going full-force in real time.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The difference is that the first two clips are dealing with countering how a hook is actually done by someone with some skill and the WC clip is showing how to counter a "hay maker".

[Hendrik]

That way will get you KTFO with the other side hook.

There's a reason you won't see that being done by people who are actually going full-force in real time.


Good point.

[LaRoux]

The difference is that the first two clips are dealing with countering how a hook is actually done by someone with some skill and the WC clip is showing how to counter a "hay maker".

Haymaker or not, it's generally not a good idea to stop a punch by committing both of your arms to one side of the opponent's body. At 9:43, there is the perfect set up to get KTFO with the left hand.

[Hendrik]

The difference is that the first two clips are dealing with countering how a hook is actually done by someone with some skill and the WC clip is showing how to counter a "hay maker".

No matter which one, it is a matter of how to handling the body. If the body cannot take the impact at the contact. the story end there disregard of which one.

[Hendrik]

Haymaker or not, it's generally not a good idea to stop a punch by committing both of your arms to one side of the opponent's body. At 9:43, there is the perfect set up to get KTFO with the left hand.

1. It is capturing the center, not one side. As in 10.1

2.Your grappling utube above is using the same type of concept with variation.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Haymaker or not, it's generally not a good idea to stop a punch by committing both of your arms to one side of the opponent's body. At 9:43, there is the perfect set up to get KTFO with the left hand.

No argument there.

[sanjuro_ronin]

No matter which one, it is a matter of how to handling the body. If the body cannot take the impact at the contact. the story end there disregard of which one.

It matters a great deal because a proper hook would NOT be stopped like that at all.

[sanjuro_ronin]

1. It is capturing the center, not one side. As in 10.1

2.Your grappling utube above is using the same type of concept with variation.

I think you need to re-watch the grappling video.

[Hendrik]

It matters a great deal because a proper hook would NOT be stopped like that at all.

Totally agree.

It is like a colision car, one can't stop it as momentum is vacuumed . As some wcner believe the closer path is a straight line between two points, but totally living in momentum vacuum.

[Hendrik]

I think you need to re-watch the grappling video.

IMO,

Take a look at 0.08. Instead of one arm striking to the center, he push on the other shoulder side.

Same thing, the assumption is one can take the incoming momentum. Otherwise it will not work. So, IMHO, all these technics are just technics . They are all condition technics. Not unconditional technics . A smaller guy will have problem to execute it in general.

[LaRoux]

IMO,

Take a look at 0.08. Instead of one arm striking to the center, he push on the other shoulder side.

Yes, exactly


Same thing, the assumption is one can take the incoming momentum. Otherwise it will not work. So, IMHO, all these technics are just technics . They are all condition technics. Not unconditional technics . A smaller guy will have problem to execute it in general.

No, not the same thing. Not even close. Going to the opposite side is completely different and is the key differentiator between something that will work and something that will get you KTFO.

[k gledhill]

Lets not forget a vt punch in the face as a counter.

[Hendrik]

Yes, exactly



No, not the same thing. Not even close. Going to the opposite side is completely different and is the key differentiator between something that will work and something that will get you KTFO.


Agree in one way,
However, This can be argue.



My point is can one take the impact momentum. The grappling way rely on strong body muscle to sustain at the point of impact at the first time.

While the wing Chun example is making use of the incoming collision if the body can hold.

So, all these technics looks good, but it is the handling of the body which is critical. That is what not being address in general.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Agree in one way,
However, This can be argue.



My point is can one take the impact momentum. The grappling way rely on strong body muscle to sustain at the point of impact at the first time.

While the wing Chun example is making use of the incoming collision if the body can hold.

So, all these technics looks good, but it is the handling of the body which is critical. That is what not being address in general.

The grappling method does NOT rely on a strong body, the position of the arm will cause the wide hook to be parried off, the forward movement gets the defender inside the zone of max danger, the opposite arms checks the opponents other hand AND gets control of one of the opponents prime levers (neck and head), etc, etc.

[LaRoux]

The grappling way rely on strong body muscle to sustain at the point of impact at the first time.

The grappling method uses close in control, which takes away the opponent's momentum and leverage, making strength and size much less of an issue.

The wing Chun method does not do that, which makes strength and size much more of an issue.

[YouKnowWho]

Just comment the techniques and nothing to do with the instructor in the clip.

1. At 0.27, he uses "comb hair (crazy monkey)" to block the left hook. If his opponent's punch is powerful and also since he doesn't have gloves on, his opponent's left hook could go through his right arm block, knock his right arm down along with his head. It's better to move his right arm in an 45 degree outward angle. This way his right arm and his head will have more gape and he can allow his body structure to take the shocking from that strong punch.

At 1.30, when he dodges under his opponent's left hook, he should use his right hand to cover on his opponent's left elbow joint. This way, he can prevent his opponent from doing:

- left elbow on his head.
- left arm reverse head lock (guillotine) on his neck.
- left back fist on top of his head.

Striking (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iE8qA_Gcn8)

2. At 0.30, his right arm is above his opponent's left arm. If his opponent's left arm wraps on his waist ASAP, he won't have any space to move his right arm under his opponent's left arm and achieve "waist wrap" at that moment. A head lock will be more proper to apply.

Grappling (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LnQS_pXzpI)

3. At 9.30, his right side is open (leak). He may do that on purpose to invite his opponent's left punh. He may also don't care whether his opponent may throw a left hook or not. Since his right hand is already on his opponent's right shoulder. It's very easy for him to slide his right arm and get his opponent a reverse head lock (guillotine). This will not only counter his opponent's left hook punch, it also force his striker opponent to play his favor grappling game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3hLnXD8SlA

[LaRoux]

It's better to move his right arm in an 45 degree outward angle. This way his right arm and his head will have more gape and he can allow his body structure to take the havey punch shocking.

Opening up space like that would be another good way to get KTFO by a follow up cross.


At 1.30 of this clip, when he dodges under his opponent's left hook, he should use his right hand to cover on his opponent's left elbow joint. This way, not only his opponent won't change his left hook into back fist on top his head, he can also prevent his opponent from using left reverse head lock (guillotine) on him.

Backfist to the top of the head is hardly a concern. Also there's no guillotine opening there if it is done the way he shows it.



At 0.30, his right arm is above his opponent's left arm. It may be difficult to move his right arm under his opponent's left arm and achieve "waist wrap". A head lock will be more proper to apply at that time.

It's called pummeling and it's done all the time in MMA and grappling.


. At 9.30, if his opponent throws a left hook, since his right hand is already on his opponent's right shoulder. It's very easy for him to slide his right arm and get his opponent a reverse head lock (guillotine).

Not as long the the opponent has his head up as was done in the clip.

[Hendrik]

The grappling method does NOT rely on a strong body, the position of the arm will cause the wide hook to be parried off, the forward movement gets the defender inside the zone of max danger, the opposite arms checks the opponents other hand AND gets control of one of the opponents prime levers (neck and head), etc, etc.

Just think if the defender is one size smaller how easy or difficult to absorb the impact momentum.

[Hendrik]

The grappling method uses close in control, which takes away the opponent's momentum and leverage, making strength and size much less of an issue.

The wing Chun method does not do that, which makes strength and size much more of an issue.


Close control still has to deal with momentum so body mass count.

Wing Chun method is shown with a one size smaller body which rely on how good the structure hold to make use of the collision.

Different of body mechanics, different type of art. Depend on what is one develop in ones body. IMHO.

[Hendrik]

A wing Chun solution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z38hM4LCBU

[YouKnowWho]

1. Opening up space like that would be another good way to get KTFO by a follow up cross.

He is on his opponent's left side door. If his right hand can press on his opponent's right elbow, his opponent's left arm is disabled. His opponent's right arm will be jamed by his opponent's left arm. There is no way that his oppponent can throw a "cross". That's the beauty of the "side door entry".

2. Backfist to the top of the head is hardly a concern. Also there's no guillotine opening there if it is done the way he shows it.

If your opponent uses right hand to block your left elbow (the right counter), you can still use your right hand to remove his right hand and follow by a back fist on top his head. The reverse head lock (guillotine) is the best counter to against a hook punch underneath dodging. The correct dodging is to have your neck to be parallel to the ground. This way, your body doesn't have to drop so low. To keep your head up while dodge under a hook punch will require your body to drop much lower than you have too.

3. It's called pummeling and it's done all the time in MMA and grappling.

Not if your oponent has a tight left arm waist wrap on you. If he doesn't want to use head lock (very hard to develop), an over hook will do just fine.

4. Not as long the the opponent has his head up as was done in the clip.

It depend on how strong your reverse head lock (guillotine) is. A strong head lock can take a full grown cow down to the ground. Again, it's very hard to develop a strong head lock.

[Hendrik]

Great analysis !

Thanks John!



1. Opening up space like that would be another good way to get KTFO by a follow up cross.

He is on his opponent's left side door. If his right hand can press on his opponent's right elbow, his opponent's left arm is disabled. His opponent's right arm will be jamed by his opponent's left arm. There is no way that his oppponent can throw a "cross". That's the beauty of the "side door entry".

2. Backfist to the top of the head is hardly a concern. Also there's no guillotine opening there if it is done the way he shows it.

If your opponent uses right hand to block your left elbow (the right counter), you can still use your right hand to remove his right hand and follow by a back fist on top his head. The reverse head lock (guillotine) is the best counter to against a hook punch underneath dodging. The correct dodging is to have your neck to be parallel to the ground. This way, your body doesn't have to drop so low. To keep your head up while dodge under a hook punch will require your body to drop much lower than you have too.

3. It's called pummeling and it's done all the time in MMA and grappling.

Not if your oponent has a tight left arm waist wrap on you. If he doesn't want to use head lock (very hard to develop), an over hook will do just fine.

4. Not as long the the opponent has his head up as was done in the clip.

It depend on how strong your reverse head lock (guillotine) is. A strong head lock can take a full grown cow down to the ground. Again, it's very hard to develop a strong head lock.

[LaRoux]

He is on his opponent's left side door. If his right hand can press on his opponent's right elbow, his opponent's left arm is disabled. His opponent's right arm will be jamed by his opponent's left arm. There is no way that his oppponent can throw a "cross". That's the beauty of the "side door entry".

I must be missing something here. Are there any examples of people actually using what you are talking about here. Or are you just theorizing on what you think might work?




If your opponent uses right hand to block your left elbow (the right counter), you can still use your right hand to remove his right hand and follow by a back fist on top his head.

Why anyone would think that a backfist to the top of the head would do any damage is just astounding.



The reverse head lock (guillotine) is the best counter to against a hook punch underneath dodging. The correct dodging is to have your neck to be parallel to the ground. This way, your body doesn't have to drop so low. To keep your head up while dodge under a hook punch will require your body to drop much lower than you have too.

Watch the video again and see the problem with getting the guillotine from there... it's going to be next to impossible.




Not if your oponent has a tight left arm waist wrap on you. If he doesn't want to use head lock (very hard to develop), an over hook will do just fine.

Watch the video again. Notice how both inner arms are blocked.



It depend on how strong your reverse head lock (guillotine) is. A strong head lock can take a full grown cow down to the ground. Again, it's very hard to develop a strong head lock.

You can have the strongest guillotine out there, but the opponent's head still needs to be down. Watch the clip again and then please explain how in the heck the smaller guy is even going be able to get up to the height to even get a wrap for the guillotine.

[YouKnowWho]

1. I must be missing something here. Are there any examples of people actually using what you are talking about here. Or are you just theorizing on what you think might work?

Boxers do that all the time. If your opponent has left side forward, in order to avoid his strong right cross or right hook, you keep moving toward to his left side (your right side).

2. Why anyone would think that a backfist to the top of the head would do any damage is just astounding.

2 XingYi masters challenged the XingYi instructor who taught the Nanking Central MA Institute. The challenger used a Beng Chuan to attack. The XingYi instructor used his left hand to downward parry the straight punch followed by a back fist on top of the challenger's head. The challenger dropped all the way down to the ground. If your opponent's neck is strong than your arm, it's time to put your tail between your legs and run like hell.

3. Watch the video again and see the problem with getting the guillotine from there... it's going to be next to impossible.

If guillotine is your "bread and butter", you will always make it work no matter how hard that your opponent may resists.

4. Watch the video again. Notice how both inner arms are blocked.

If your arm is

- above your opponent's arm, you should use head lock or over hook.
- below your opponent's arm, you should use waist wrap or under hook.

If your opponent has basic grappling skill, he won't let your arm to move above his arm and then move below his arm as if his arm doesn't exist.

5. You can have the strongest guillotine out there, but the opponent's head still needs to be down. Watch the clip again and then please explain how in the heck the smaller guy is even going be able to get up to the height to even get a wrap for the guillotine.

The head lock and reverse head lock are used by a tall person to against a short person or someone with the same height. If your opponent's neck is stronger than your arm, you will have problem.

[LaRoux]

Boxers do that all the time. If your opponent has left side forward, in order to avoid his strong right cross or right hook, you keep moving toward to his left side (your right side).

Really? Show one example of a boxer weaving under the hook and then pressing on the elbow to stop the cross.



XingYi masters challenged the XingYi instructor who taught the Nanking Central MA Institute. The challenger used a Beng Chuan to attack. The XingYi instructor used his left hand to downward parry the straight punch followed by a back fist on top of the challenger's head. The challenger dropped all the way down to the ground.

More anecdotal BS.



If guillotine is your "bread and butter", you will always make it work no matter how hard that your opponent may resists.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think that.



If your opponent has basic grappling skill, he won't let your arm to move above his arm and then move below his arm as if his arm doesn't exist.

Exactly. Which makes what you are talking about pretty much unworkable yet again.




The head lock and reverse head lock are used by a tall person to against a short person or someone with the same height. If your opponent's neck is stronger than your arm, you will have problem.

It has very little to do with strength and mostly do with the technique and knowing what position to use it in.

[Bernard]

I must be missing something here. Are there any examples of people actually using what you are talking about here. Or are you just theorizing on what you think might work?




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PdKP5t2BYY

Not sure, but I think YKW is talking the concepts shown in this vid. I don't use it exactly like how the guy in the vid does, but I've used something similar a couple times when I sparred with a muay thai friend. I tried to teach it to him but he had a difficult time getting the movement down.

[YouKnowWho]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PdKP5t2BYY

Not sure, but I think YKW is talking the concepts shown in this vid. I don't use it exactly like how the guy in the vid does, but I've used something similar a couple times when I sparred with a muay thai friend. I tried to teach it to him but he had a difficult time getting the movement down.

The "偏(Pian) - Head circling" is also commonly used in Judo. When your opponent gets you an upper collar hold, you can move your head under his arm, over to the other side. This way his upper collar hold will lost effect on you. Since his elbow is free, you have to put some restriction on his elbow mobility. This is similiar to the MT neck tie but Judo upper colar hold usually use more straight elbow to hold opponent back. Not like the MT neck tie use the forearm to against opponent's body which doesn't give his opponent much room to move his head under it.

Oneday in UFC when someone dodges under a hook punch, his opponent gets an sideway elbow on the side of his face, people will start to pay attention on this technique. Until then, we can only assume if it hasn't been used in UFC, it must be an unrealistic technique.

[russellsherry]

hi guys i never ever number one rule use tan da to counter a hook , first you cant always tell what angle the punch , is coming from personally i prefer using my punching arm to counter the hook and the Bruce lee pak sau back up or bill sau tan da is a pretty dangerous move considering the situation i c onside that in some situations it will work but against a good boxer or choy lay fut guy no way Russ

[Bernard]

Oneday in UFC when someone dodges under a hook punch, his opponent gets an sideway elbow on the side of his face, people will start to pay attention on this technique. Until then, we can only assume if it hasn't been used in UFC, it must be an unrealistic technique.

There are those who would consider these "spinning techniques to be unrealistic, but since they have been used in mma...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bks-BDah_Yo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r438tkdbBc

[YouKnowWho]

There are those who would consider these "spinning techniques to be unrealistic, but since they have been used in mma...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bks-BDah_Yo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r438tkdbBc

Those fights that people with "special skill" are much more fun to watch. Unfortunately those "special skill" will take longer time to develop. Some modern guys just don't have the patient. This is why instead of learning some proper throwing skill, people just take the short cut and use "pull guard" instead.

[Bernard]

Those fights that people with "special skill" are much more fun to watch. Unfortunately those "special skill" will take longer time to develop. Some modern guys just don't have the patient. This is why instead of learning some proper throwing skill, people just take the short cut and use "pull guard" instead.

I totally agree. Some techniques are just easier to pick up than others. Nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't mean the techniques that may be trickier to learn for most people aren't valid techniques. Besides you can't just talk techniques alone. They go hand in hand with the strategy and tactics that go into setting them up.

[YouKnowWho]

I totally agree. Some techniques are just easier to pick up than others. Nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't mean the techniques that may be trickier to learn for most people aren't valid techniques. Besides you can't just talk techniques alone. They go hand in hand with the strategy and tactics that go into setting them up.

Agree! It's not just one technique. It's the whole package deal. Sometime in order to be good at one technique, one needs to learn many techniques to support that single technique.

If every UFC fighter fights the same way, people will get bored quickly.

[wingchunIan]

the forward movement gets the defender inside the zone of max danger,

IMO this should be true of the Wing Chun footwork also (no comment on the HC vid, he has his own way of doing things) only difference being that the hand the grappler places on the shoulder / chest and subsequently converts into an underhook / body wrap would be striking in the way I train.

[wingchunIan]

A wing Chun solution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z38hM4LCBU

This clip shows pretty much how I train to defend hooks (even though it is a different lineage - who'd have thought....). Intercept the line of the attack early in its arc and close the distance, keep the hands tight and occupy the space rather than chasing the arms.

[YouKnowWho]

This clip shows pretty much how I train to defend hooks (even though it is a different lineage - who'd have thought....). Intercept the line of the attack early in its arc and close the distance, keep the hands tight and occupy the space rather than chasing the arms.

Same method used in non-WC TCMA system too. It's called "斜打(Xie Da) - diagonal strike" instead of Tan Pai Shou. Your right palm strike diagonally to your opponent's right shoulder. You keep your right side open to invite a punch so you can "wrap his punching arm".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ2DByegHV0

[Frost]

Just comment the techniques and nothing to do with the instructor in the clip.

1. At 0.27, he uses "comb hair (crazy monkey)" to block the left hook. If his opponent's punch is powerful and also since he doesn't have gloves on, his opponent's left hook could go through his right arm block, knock his right arm down along with his head. It's better to move his right arm in an 45 degree outward angle. This way his right arm and his head will have more gape and he can allow his body structure to take the shocking from that strong punch.

At 1.30, when he dodges under his opponent's left hook, he should use his right hand to cover on his opponent's left elbow joint. This way, he can prevent his opponent from doing:

- left elbow on his head.
- left arm reverse head lock (guillotine) on his neck.
- left back fist on top of his head.

Striking (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iE8qA_Gcn8)

2. At 0.30, his right arm is above his opponent's left arm. If his opponent's left arm wraps on his waist ASAP, he won't have any space to move his right arm under his opponent's left arm and achieve "waist wrap" at that moment. A head lock will be more proper to apply.

Grappling (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LnQS_pXzpI)

3. At 9.30, his right side is open (leak). He may do that on purpose to invite his opponent's left punh. He may also don't care whether his opponent may throw a left hook or not. Since his right hand is already on his opponent's right shoulder. It's very easy for him to slide his right arm and get his opponent a reverse head lock (guillotine). This will not only counter his opponent's left hook punch, it also force his striker opponent to play his favor grappling game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3hLnXD8SlA

A comment on all this what he is showing are boxing specific not MMA

He doesn’t use crazy monkey he is simply shelling he is showing it without gloves, with gloves the gap isn’t there, if it was MMA and he was doing crazey monkey the hand would be pulled back more the gap made smaller and nothing would get through but the elbow would still be in the middle

Secondly when he goes under the hook he is talking to the camera, in reality his hand would be up and none of what you mention would happen, and the guillotine is never going to come into play there because he is bending at the legs and not the waist the guillotine is simply not an option

Thirdly a general point on the thread the wing chun example is not going to stop a proper hook at all, would people please do these demos against boxers who can actually hook?

[Graham H]

A wing Chun solution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z38hM4LCBU

It is not a good idea to try and attack the arm when trying to defend a hook punch. In a controlled environment you can make many things work. In a real fight things are too fast and furious and to think you can make contact with the correct part of the arm at the right time to stop a hook is not safe IMO.

What if the opponent was throwing two hooks or one followed by a right cross, a kick or a grab? You would get yourself into all sorts of problems trying to catch the arm that way.

I tried such an action once against a person who didn't know any Wing Chun or MMA although he was know to be able to tear it up a bit. I made this mistake of trying to catch the punch with tan da. Although I ended getting the better of him, his leg came up and I nearly took one in the goolash. I later changed my thing to fook sau.......even worse. Still the same problem. Now I have a different idea that doesn't get me into strife.

Many Wing Chun actions that I have been taught in the past and see on many YouTube videos never stop to consider what may be thrown next. The Teacher/Student knows which punch is coming and therefore success is a little more certain. This way of defending a hook is too 50/50 meaning that your opponent has as much chance of making contact as you even though you are throwing what seems to be an attacking action.

In my opinion it's much better to try and stop the opponent hooking at all. A kick is much more practical than chasing arms. Pre emting an attack is also better if possible. There is a whole strategy in Ving Tsun that limits where the opponent can aim his punches by not presenting yourself as a square on target. I rarely see that in most cases of Ving Tsun.

If you are to remain square, fail to pre empt, fail to throw a kick or offset/upset your opponent then maybe you are going to get hit that day. The chances of getting hit in a fight are a lot greater than not being hit. Realizing that and accepting it is a lot better than trying to stop arms in specific areas when the guy/guys stood in front of you are trying to seriously hurt you by any means necessary.

This whole tan da/fook da nonsense is rubbish. Best way to try is to ask somebody to try and hit you properly not knowing which attacks are going to be thrown. A lot of questions are answered and most people I have contact with suddenly start seriously questioning what Wing Chun they have been taught.

[Paul T England]

Counter with a punch, palm, forearm, elbow, cover with the free hand. (crazxy monkey, tan, biu, whatever is instinctive.)

Paul

[Graham H]

cover with the free hand.

Paul

You mean like a boxer???? :confused:

So you are trying to prevent the hook from making contact by using your hand to cover?:confused:

Please elaborate

[Wayfaring]

What most people miss training against the hook is the weight transfer. Meaning WHEN you are going to see the hook. The cross or straight 2 punch transfers the weight forward onto the front leg. The hook transfers the weight back to the back leg. Thus in a sense its shifting the weight back away from the opponent and the entry of the punch is on a blind angle.

Of course there are hooks with both hands and other entries. But I have NEVER seen any WCK instructionals on countering the hook that properly deals with the context and weight transfer where you are most likely to encounter the hook. Almost all instructionals have a guy stepping forward hooking just like they would a haymaker or a straight punch. That's pretty much outside the realm of when you would actually see it live, and it's missing a lot of the live energy. So if you train it that way, you'll probably get hit by one without seeing it in a live environment.

[wingchunIan]

What most people miss training against the hook is the weight transfer. Meaning WHEN you are going to see the hook. The cross or straight 2 punch transfers the weight forward onto the front leg. The hook transfers the weight back to the back leg.


Not in any boxing gym or MT camp that I've ever trained in. You can throw a hook whilst transferring the weight backwards if you are in retreat but the most powerful and therefore preffered way of throwing it is to keep the weight forward, sink the weight and drive the punch from the waist and legs

[Frost]

Not in any boxing gym or MT camp that I've ever trained in. You can throw a hook whilst transferring the weight backwards if you are in retreat but the most powerful and therefore preffered way of throwing it is to keep the weight forward, sink the weight and drive the punch from the waist and legs

Ive seen it taught as wayfring stats in a few boxing gyms its also how its taught in my main mma gym...but either way the defense showed will not work against a proper hook

[wingchunIan]

Ive seen it taught as wayfring stats in a few boxing gyms its also how its taught in my main mma gym...but either way the defense showed will not work against a proper hook

Interesting, IME from a lead arm the weight normally transfers to the back leg as the punch is thrown simply because it is actually trying to go side to side as you drive off the lead leg to throw it and typically it only happens when the punch is done in air or it misses as otherwise the impact of the blow stops the arm and the transfer of momentum.
Anyway why in your opinion would the defence shown by DP in Hendrick's second clip not work against a proper hook?

[k gledhill]

It is not a good idea to try and attack the arm when trying to defend a hook punch. In a controlled environment you can make many things work. In a real fight things are too fast and furious and to think you can make contact with the correct part of the arm at the right time to stop a hook is not safe IMO.

What if the opponent was throwing two hooks or one followed by a right cross, a kick or a grab? You would get yourself into all sorts of problems trying to catch the arm that way.

I tried such an action once against a person who didn't know any Wing Chun or MMA although he was know to be able to tear it up a bit. I made this mistake of trying to catch the punch with tan da. Although I ended getting the better of him, his leg came up and I nearly took one in the goolash. I later changed my thing to fook sau.......even worse. Still the same problem. Now I have a different idea that doesn't get me into strife.

Many Wing Chun actions that I have been taught in the past and see on many YouTube videos never stop to consider what may be thrown next. The Teacher/Student knows which punch is coming and therefore success is a little more certain. This way of defending a hook is too 50/50 meaning that your opponent has as much chance of making contact as you even though you are throwing what seems to be an attacking action.

In my opinion it's much better to try and stop the opponent hooking at all. A kick is much more practical than chasing arms. Pre emting an attack is also better if possible. There is a whole strategy in Ving Tsun that limits where the opponent can aim his punches by not presenting yourself as a square on target. I rarely see that in most cases of Ving Tsun.

If you are to remain square, fail to pre empt, fail to throw a kick or offset/upset your opponent then maybe you are going to get hit that day. The chances of getting hit in a fight are a lot greater than not being hit. Realizing that and accepting it is a lot better than trying to stop arms in specific areas when the guy/guys stood in front of you are trying to seriously hurt you by any means necessary.

This whole tan da/fook da nonsense is rubbish. Best way to try is to ask somebody to try and hit you properly not knowing which attacks are going to be thrown. A lot of questions are answered and most people I have contact with suddenly start seriously questioning what Wing Chun they have been taught.

Same here...

[Wayfaring]

Not in any boxing gym or MT camp that I've ever trained in. You can throw a hook whilst transferring the weight backwards if you are in retreat but the most powerful and therefore preffered way of throwing it is to keep the weight forward, sink the weight and drive the punch from the waist and legs

sounds like what you are experiencing they may call a hook to the body, a body punch, or a 4 or 5 punch. that's what my coach who is a pro boxer calls it anyway. these are the same mechanics as an uppercut.

the 3 punch, or hook, is different. you will typically experience it right off the 2 punch. the sequence will look like this - multiple jabs to probe a guard, footwork to set up an angle, then a 2 punch straight which either lands or has a lot of crashing energy against what's blocking it. the range comes in closer like true WCK range or maybe a tad closer, with a forward weight transfer. then the hook moves away from that crash, transfer weight to the back foot and turn. it capitalizes on someone trying to counter the 2 punch immediately, and is timed to catch them coming in.

my understanding anyway, and there's lots of schools of boxing so your instruction may vary.

what i'm saying is the nature of the sequence and energies have WCK people training the wrong thing. this is why tan sau really isn't the answer to a hook. every tan sau hook defense I've seen the guy doing the tan sau is stepping in to the opponent to block the hook. it's an intercepting energy catching the punch stepping in and moving forward. but a true hook isn't moving in and forward, it's already been there with the 2 punch. it's now recovering distance by weight transfer away, same direction as the interception movement is going and is depositing a knuckle to the side of the head or chin on the way out.

so with the 2-3 combo, you can tan sau the 2, then look to tan sau the 3 and get caught right in the kisser with it. this is from experience.

oh, but I tan-da and then pursue and the simultaneous defense / offense overwhelms my opponent and he backs off not throwing punches. i'm telling you a good 2-3 - you get clocked with the 3 still.

how do boxers deal with it? make it miss due to foot / head movement or cover at the last minute with hand over ear and elbow high and roll with the force to lessen it.

[wingchunIan]

Same here...

Still haven't heard anything by way of a realistic alternative. The post you quoted from Graham (thought I'd removed him from my ignore list but obviously I failed) is ok in terms of using kicks, angles etc to prevent a hook from being thrown but in essence you can say the same about every attack. You can't always dictate what the opponent will throw despite your best efforts so you have to have some means of defending against a hook if you find yourself the target of one.
I have a couple of other methods of dealing with hooks to the head in addition to the one shown but would be interested in what your particular approaches are?

[LaRoux]

Those fights that people with "special skill" are much more fun to watch. Unfortunately those "special skill" will take longer time to develop. Some modern guys just don't have the patient. This is why instead of learning some proper throwing skill, people just take the short cut and use "pull guard" instead.

People who pull guard generally aren't doing so because they don't have the patience to learn to throw. They pull guard because they have spent so many years becoming specialists in the ground game that they want to bring their opponent into their world as fast as possible.

[Hendrik]

Still haven't heard anything by way of a realistic alternative. The post you quoted from Graham (thought I'd removed him from my ignore list but obviously I failed) is ok in terms of using kicks, angles etc to prevent a hook from being thrown but in essence you can say the same about every attack. You can't always dictate what the opponent will throw despite your best efforts so you have to have some means of defending against a hook if you find yourself the target of one.
I have a couple of other methods of dealing with hooks to the head in addition to the one shown but would be interested in what your particular approaches are?

IMHO,
Often we have no choice in our angle and distance....ect. So, it boiled down to can be body take it and what is the min casualty if one cannot handle the momentum. I have never believe in angle alone because wing Chun has direct, roundabout, and recovery , the three basic momentum handling in order to cover the based and do the job. And everyone of these basic is heavily rely of the body or engine. It is certainly not just hand technics and step this way or step that way.

Thus, my view is it is all about the body handling or support, call it a hook , a tan sau, a ...ect, those are just technic or norm. Different people use it differently and they have different effect.

So, can the mma , the grapple, the wing Chun utube example works? Sure, but will it work unconditionally, life is complex.

[LaRoux]

So, can the mma , the grapple, the wing Chun utube example works? Sure, but will it work unconditionally, life is complex.

The boxing, grapple, Muay Thai examples are high percentage moves that are used frequently at all levels.

The wind chun example is not.

[Hendrik]

The boxing, grapple, Muay Thai examples are high percentage moves that are used frequently at all levels.

The wind chun example is not.


IMHO,


Technics are just surface, the force change and momentum handling are the beef.


In wing Chun terminology, on the above utubes examples.

At the instant of contact, or handling momentum. That is the critical point.

The boxing example is called blocking force or 克力 or hack Lik, the pre requisite is the body has to be able to take or sustain.

The grappling example is called splitting force or 拆力 or chat Lik, the prequisite is the body has to be able to hold evenly to divert.

The both wing Chun example is called hitting force or 打力, the prequisite is the body structure has to be able to integrate to make use of the collision.

So, WCK has all these force change type handling ! this is the Jin or 勁handling which is based on momentum or 勢 handling or wing Chun. The tool to capture center line.


It is based on physics and causal system.

Everyone of the above handling has a pro and con and greatly depend on the person body development, and situation.

The issue is not wing Chun, the issue is if wcners have develop the wing Chun Kung fu needed. In this case, one can choose which handling is the best in the situation.

And of cause the wingchun example works, because that is what was used in 1850 battle field, versus those who use swing and hook southern fist. Like a bunker missile it penetrate in. IMHO.

[LaRoux]

And of cause the wingchun example works, because that is what was used in 1850 battle field, versus those who use swing and hook southern fist. Like a bunker missile it penetrate in. IMHO.

Wing chun way = I read that it worked in 1850, so it must work. I'm not going to go out and actually try it out to see if it works.

Boxing, Muay Thai, grappling, MMA way = I can see examples of it working all the time in the present, so it must work. If I can't see it working all the time, I'm going to go out and try it on live resisting opponents to decide whether or not it works.

[YouKnowWho]

It's much easier to block a staff that swing at your head than to block a spear that stab at your heart. It's much easier to block a hook punch than to block a jab or cross. The bending on the elbow joint will give you some extra room to work with.

[Hendrik]

Wing chun way = I read that it worked in 1850, so it must work. I'm not going to go out and actually try it out to see if it works.

Boxing, Muay Thai, grappling, MMA way = I can see examples of it working all the time in the present, so it must work. If I can't see it working all the time, I'm going to go out and try it on live resisting opponents to decide whether or not it works.


You obviously read And inteprate what you like to, instead of read and comprehend what I Have posted in full.

[Frost]

Interesting, IME from a lead arm the weight normally transfers to the back leg as the punch is thrown simply because it is actually trying to go side to side as you drive off the lead leg to throw it and typically it only happens when the punch is done in air or it misses as otherwise the impact of the blow stops the arm and the transfer of momentum.
Anyway why in your opinion would the defence shown by DP in Hendrick's second clip not work against a proper hook?

partly for the reasons wayfring talked about, partly due to the fact no one actually hooks like that, partly due to the fact that at the range a real hook is used you dont have the time to do anything like extend you arm turn you strucutre and react like that (you barely have enough time to cover or duck), and partly because the momentum and power of a proper lead hook will blow through that structure and still tag you, the rotational power combined with leg drive from front to back makes the hook in my opinion much more powerful than the structure used in that clip (assuming you have time to get it in place and thats a big assumption)

[wingchunIan]

partly for the reasons wayfring talked about, partly due to the fact no one actually hooks like that, partly due to the fact that at the range a real hook is used you dont have the time to do anything like extend you arm turn you strucutre and react like that (you barely have enough time to cover or duck), and partly because the momentum and power of a proper lead hook will blow through that structure and still tag you, the rotational power combined with leg drive from front to back makes the hook in my opinion much more powerful than the structure used in that clip (assuming you have time to get it in place and thats a big assumption)

OK so again we can agree to have differing views. From my perspective your hands should already be up so no time needed there and as far as turning the structure or angling it takes less time for me to that than to duck, bob , weave etc its all a question of what you train and keeping the movement as small as possible. Wrt the structure not being strong enough again I'd say depends if you train your positions sufficiently, I've used it to stop very heavy shots from guys who know how to throw and who have 7 or 8 stone on me in bodyweight. Anyway, my main interest in this thread is hearing about different approaches rather than explaining/defending what I already do so I'll shut up now and wait to see if anyone comes up with anything worth reading.

[LaRoux]

OK so again we can agree to have differing views. From my perspective your hands should already be up so no time needed there and as far as turning the structure or angling it takes less time for me to that than to duck, bob , weave etc its all a question of what you train and keeping the movement as small as possible. Wrt the structure not being strong enough again I'd say depends if you train your positions sufficiently, I've used it to stop very heavy shots from guys who know how to throw and who have 7 or 8 stone on me in bodyweight. Anyway, my main interest in this thread is hearing about different approaches rather than explaining/defending what I already do so I'll shut up now and wait to see if anyone comes up with anything worth reading.

For me, I'll just keep on doing what the best in the world keep proving over and over again is effective.

[Vajramusti]

For me, I'll just keep on doing what the best in the world keep proving over and over again is effective.
---------------------------------------------
Understandable given LaRoux's perspective.

Ian's position is understandable from his perspective.

[GlennR]

Ive seen it taught as wayfring stats in a few boxing gyms its also how its taught in my main mma gym...but either way the defense showed will not work against a proper hook

You can do it both ways but the most common is transfer to the back leg for the hook.

Here's a great article highlighting how Joe Louis did it with a good breakdown of the way he applied it

http://www.boxing.com/how_to_box_by_joe_louis_part_2the_jab_left_hook.ht ml

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=GlennR;1215413]You can do it both ways but the most common is transfer to the back leg for the hook.

Here's a great article highlighting how Joe Louis did it with a good breakdown of the way he applied it

http://www.boxing.com/how_to_box_by_joe_louis_part_2the_jab_left_hook.ht ml
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks again Glenn for that good article and film on Louis' jab and hook.He was the complete machine.


Larry Holmes had a powerful jab- he actually knocked down a heavyweight( Name and national origin-Puerto Rican or Cuban-?) witha jab to the center of the forehead.

Two ton Tony had a "heavv" but not as versatile left hook of his own. Importance of the right foot
or the left foot depends on training and how you develop the torque.

[GlennR]

[QUOTE=GlennR;1215413]You can do it both ways but the most common is transfer to the back leg for the hook.

Here's a great article highlighting how Joe Louis did it with a good breakdown of the way he applied it

http://www.boxing.com/how_to_box_by_joe_louis_part_2the_jab_left_hook.ht ml
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks again Glenn for that good article and film on Louis' jab and hook.He was the complete machine.


Larry Holmes had a powerful jab- he actually knocked down a heavyweight( Name and national origin-Puerto Rican or Cuban-?) witha jab to the center of the forehead.

Two ton Tony had a "heavv" but not as versatile left hook of his own. Importance of the right foot
or the left foot depends on training and how you develop the torque.

Yep, even boxing has styles within itself.

Yet they dont ***** about the differences like WCers! ;)

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1215430]

Yep, even boxing has styles within itself.

Yet they dont ***** about the differences like WCers! ;)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True, but boxing has some more quality control- coaches, apprenticeship, records of achievements-
but wing chun has grown too rapidly spinning out of control where newbies begin lecturing as soon as they can... specially if they can get to a keyboard or click on youtube.

But also- boxing has its tremendous costs--Louis, Robinson, Frazier among so many others developed various ailments-Alzheimer, tremors.eye problems, nose problems ...
Louis unscrewing light bulbs ina Las Vegas motel room-possible paranoia
An acquaintance of mine Alvin Williams fought Patterson 3 times- basically became a punching bag with shattered reflexes..

The apparent trick is to experience the dark side without being chewed up in the darkness.

[k gledhill]

Many damaged goods in my gym...sad, someone put up a request for volunteers doing a concussion damage study like the NFL is going through.

[wingchunIan]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1215430]

Yep, even boxing has styles within itself.

Yet they dont ***** about the differences like WCers! ;)

How very true

[jesper]

[QUOTE=GlennR;1215431]

How very true

yeah, always said boxing was boring :D

[Mutant]

Not sure how to counter the hook?? jeez, didn't ya all watch Ip Man 2 ??!?! :D

Let's see, we've got several ways in our wing chun system to deal with hook punches.

1) Footwork/Movement
2) We have a way we bend and slip, called "life after death"
3) For a proper close fast hook inside, we have a hand/arm position/form that's sort of like a fook sao that's real tight to your body and head, arm shaped like a 'Z', elbow raises, wrist is bent forward with fingers splayed a bit covering head and pointed forward. My sifu calls this 'sa sao' or something like that, i've never seen it written... To do it, elbow raises up quickly as wrist bends and hand withdraws to cover head. Sifu shows applications can have hand move around head to adjust cover, or can be rising elbow strike. Its in third section of our form, from pak -> sa sao -> jut. Its nice because it covers well and even though its retracted close to you, its like a coiled spring ready to counter. Could be double hands sa sao, or combined with wu, pak or whats needed.
4) For body hooks same as above but elbows drop and should be close to body covering ribs and we'd likely rotate/turn in if there was time for that extra motion.
5) Depending on angle etc, could use a close compacted pak across and bong turned into it.
6) If you either moved and timed it out enough away from you, or if its a long-hook or haymaker, can use bil sao to counter. Or even a hooked-out tan sao, although bil sao is a bit more stable with more options. and would be countering to center with counter strike, and prefer bil jee here over punch so that elbow/triceps is in better position to counter the hook from teh other side if he beats you.

So there are some good tools. But if you just chase hands and habitually over extend you're gonna eat a lot of hooks...

[k gledhill]

Moving ! ? Crazy talk

[Bernard]

I only learned a bit of wing chun from a friend, but if I were to counter a hook I would use the following block seen @00:25 where sifu Peterson is using a palm down block.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfukLN87y2s

But footwork is needed. You have to step in and hit the attacker at the same time. Since we are stepping in close enough to clinch, I prefer a forearm shot to the side of the neck.

Also as with any fight, you need to watch the opponent's habits. If he has a tendency to hook off the jab, you can use it to set him up for this technique. "Pretend" to block/guard against the jab, so he will hook.

[Mutant]

7) Also useful close range block in transition of our 'three star punch' when fist or fists are up in a sort of 'guard' position, back of fists/forearms facing outward, done with a turn into the oncoming strike. depending on angle, range, timing can be used to counter a hook, round kick or even long weapon.

[k gledhill]

I had an incident doing bar security one night. The bar was closing I stopped two guys coming in and one gets in my face so I po pai him out of the door and follow him out. He swings a right hook without warning and I instinctively moved my jaw back and let it swing past. I then pak'ed the elbow stepping in quickly to prevent refacing and hit him 3 times until he dropped. No telegraphing, no warning, no foreknowledge.
Overturning himself as he tried to use too much force left him open to counter striking.

[Bernard]

I had an incident doing bar security one night. The bar was closing I stopped two guys coming in and one gets in my face so I po pai him out of the door and follow him out. He swings a right hook without warning and I instinctively moved my jaw back and let it swing past. I then pak'ed the elbow stepping in quickly to prevent refacing and hit him 3 times until he dropped. No telegraphing, no warning, no foreknowledge.
Overturning himself as he tried to use too much force left him open to counter striking.

That couldn't have happened! I mean you don't see it use by the best fighters in mma, right!?! ;)

[k gledhill]

That couldn't have happened! I mean you don't see it use by the best fighters in mma, right!?! ;)

Don't get that started ; )

[LaRoux]

I only learned a bit of wing chun from a friend, but if I were to counter a hook I would use the following block seen @00:25 where sifu Peterson is using a palm down block.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfukLN87y2s

That has the same issue of going to the same side of the opponent's hook as the other example did leading to the high probability of getting KTFO with the other hand.

Not to mention the fact that committing to intercepting the hook like that is a great way to get set up by the opponent's feinting with the hook.

[Mutant]

I had an incident doing bar security one night. The bar was closing I stopped two guys coming in and one gets in my face so I po pai him out of the door and follow him out. He swings a right hook without warning and I instinctively moved my jaw back and let it swing past. I then pak'ed the elbow stepping in quickly to prevent refacing and hit him 3 times until he dropped. No telegraphing, no warning, no foreknowledge.
Overturning himself as he tried to use too much force left him open to counter striking.
Nice. Yeah big difference between a proper nasty boxing punch that you'll counter at the gym (I know you see a ton at Geasons) and the way 99% of people are gonna throw them in the "streetz" lol. Of course gotta be ready for anything.

[Bernard]

That has the same issue of going to the same side of the opponent's hook as the other example did leading to the high probability of getting KTFO with the other hand.

Not to mention the fact that committing to intercepting the hook like that is a great way to get set up by the opponent's feinting with the hook.

It doesn't really matter if its a feint. We're not really blocking or intercepting. These so-called blocking techniques in conjunction with the footwork are used to cover and take us off-line of the attack. And since we are already counterattacking, my attack is one beat ahead of any attack he can make with the other hand. We can't talk about just techniques alone. It goes hand in hand with strategy and tactics.

[LaRoux]

It doesn't really matter if its a feint. We're not really blocking or intercepting. These so-called blocking techniques in conjunction with the footwork are used to cover and take us off-line of the attack. And since we are already counterattacking, my attack is one beat ahead of any attack he can make with the other hand. We can't talk about just techniques alone. It goes hand in hand with strategy and tactics.

Once again, it's very interesting that there is no actual verifiable evidence for this type of technique being used successfully on a consistent basis.

You must come from one of those thousands of wing chun schools that can only utilize your techniques in the secrecy of your school or in the r3alz world where there are no video cameras.

[Bernard]

Once again, it's very interesting that there is no actual verifiable evidence for this type of technique being used successfully on a consistent basis.

Hi LaRoux. Evidence for who? Are we on trial here? ;) Wing chun is not my primary style but I do have a little experience in this system. Do you? If so, all the evidence you will need is to take what you learn and spar. If you are as intelligent as you seem, you'll figure it out. Martial arts is something that should be done, not so much talked about in order to understand and appreciated.

I will agree that a lot the stuff shown on youtube will not work the way its demo'd but can work if approach the right way.

[LaRoux]

Hi LaRoux. Evidence for who? Are we on trial here? ;)


No one is on trial, but if you want someone to believe that you can make a technique work, you should be able to provide some kind of verifiable evidence of it working in a live situation.


Wing chun is not my primary style but I do have a little experience in this system. Do you? If so, all the evidence you will need is to take what you learn and spar. If you are as intelligent as you seem, you'll figure it out.

I've seen people try it in sparring. I haven't seen anyone make it work consistently.

You are claiming to be able to make it work in sparring. In these days of youtube and smart phones it should be a simple matter to provide this evidence.

[Bernard]

No one is on trial, but if you want someone to believe that you can make a technique work, you should be able to provide some kind of verifiable evidence of it working in a live situation.



That's just it. It doesn't matter to me. Believe what you want. It's your prerogative not to believe. I'm not trying to convert you to my "religion" ;) I'm in my forties now and don't have time for such nonsense.

But if you want, take the ideas that's given to you and try it yourself. It's not hard....

[LaRoux]

That's just it. It doesn't matter to me. Believe what you want. It's your prerogative not to believe. I'm not trying to convert you to my "religion" ;) I'm in my forties now and don't have time for such nonsense.

But if you want, take the ideas that's given to you and try it yourself. It's not hard....

That's OK, I'll stick with the things that work. I already know all the ones that don't work.

[Bernard]

That's OK, I'll stick with the things that work. I already know all the ones that don't work.

Cool, bro. Martial arts should be a personal path. Makes me wonder though why you frequent a kung fu forum...

[LaRoux]

Makes me wonder though why you frequent a kung fu forum...

That's OK, I wonder the same thing about why so many people feel the need to talk about techniques they claim to use in full-contact situations when clearly they haven't.

[Bernard]

That's OK, I wonder the same thing about why so many people feel the need to talk about techniques they claim to use in full-contact situations when clearly they haven't.

Nice evasion. Are you trying to convert us to your religion ;) or do I smell troll... :D

Just kidding bro. Have a great day!

[trubblman]

Lets not forget a vt punch in the face as a counter.

Better yet a kick to the ballocks

[k gledhill]

Better yet a kick to the ballocks

A little movement and angling lets the opponent show you how to counter hit them.

[k gledhill]

If you expect hooks distance management is key.

[Vajramusti]

In their first fight Frazier knocked Ali down with a hook.
But Ali survived, Almost everyone else would have been in dreamland.

[YouKnowWho]

If you expect hooks distance management is key.

To "move back" and remain distance is from the striker point of view. To move back, you may dodge this hook but you still have to dodge next hook and the hook after that.

From the grappler's point of view is to "move in", wrap his arms, head lock or over hook, and take him down. This way, you have solve your hook punch problem once for all. The rest is just to force the boxer to play your favor ground game.

[Vajramusti]

To "move back" and remain distance is from the striker point of view. To move back, you may dodge this hook but you still have to dodge next hook and the hook after that.

From the grappler's point of view is to "move in", wrap his arms, head lock or over hook, and take him down. This way, you have solve your hook punch problem once for all. The rest is just to force the boxer to play your favor ground game.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Sure. This just boxing in a ring. Some boxers know how to adapt outside of the ring.
Depends...

[Vajramusti]

Ali had that famous demo "match" against the well known Japanese grappler Inoki.
Inoki just laid down on the floor, crawled around on his back kicking Ali's legs. Rules required that Ali coould box with gloves on.
A no contest but Ali's legs were black and blue.

[YouKnowWho]

The WC left Tan Shou, right Pai Shou is on the right track. If you can just

- slide your right Pai Shou behind your opponent's neck,
- step your right leg back (this will create distance between your body and his left punch),
- pull his neck and spin to your right,
- wait for him to step in his left leg forward,
- you then attack his left leg.

[k gledhill]

In their first fight Frazier knocked Ali down with a hook.
But Ali survived, Almost everyone else would have been in dreamland.

And in the picture he missed ...

[k gledhill]

The WC Tan Pai Shou is on the right track. If you can just slide your Pai Shou behind your opponent's neck ...

Not sure where you get your ideas about VT. If I move back in a straight line one can close their eyes and advance on me to grapple or swing. That's why we angle, it forces shifts in direction and allows counters on recovery of errors.

[YouKnowWho]

Not sure where you get your ideas about VT. If I move back in a straight line one can close their eyes and advance on me to grapple or swing. That's why we angle, it forces shifts in direction and allows counters on recovery of errors.

You want your opponent to advance on you, and "step in his left leg". His left leg is what you are waiting for.

Since you already have 2 contact points on his body, your left arm Tang Shou and your right hand behind his neck, when you attack his left leg, you will have all 3 contact points that you need to take him down.

Again, this is from a grappler point of view and not from a striker point of view.

[k gledhill]

You want your opponent to advance on you, and "step in his left leg". His left leg is what you are waiting for.

Since you already have 2 contact points on his body. Your left arm Tang Shou and your right hand behind his neck, when you attack his left leg, you will have 3 contact points.

Not Ving Tsun.

[YouKnowWho]

Not Ving Tsun.

I know. Tan Pai Shou is much more useful than just used in the striking art. The moment that you start to use Tan Pai Shou, you have just open your door and enter into the grappling world.

When your right Pai Shou is on your opponent's right shoulder, depending on his respond, you can

- move your right hand behind his neck.
- drop your right forearm across his throat.
- raise your right elbow as Bong Shou to block his left punch (hide your head under your right Bong Shou).
- ...

The Tan Pai Shou is a "door open" move. There are many possibilities after that (if you don't restrict yourself only in the striking world).

[k gledhill]

I know. Tan Pai Shou is much more useful than just used in the striking art. The moment that you start to use Tan Pai Shou, you have just open your door and enter into the grappling world.

When your right Pai Shou is on your opponent's right shoulder, depending on his respond, you can

- move your right hand behind his neck.
- drop your right forearm across his throat.
- raise your right elbow as Bong Shou to block his left punch (hide your head under your right Bong Shou).
- ...

The Tan Pai Shou is a "door open" move. There are many possibilities after that (if you don't restrict yourself only in the striking world).


Tan sao is a punching concept, often mistaken as a can opener, a low five , a qi transporter, a begging hand out side the local bodega , omnipotent defense posture ( not ) by Hendrik.

[Vajramusti]

The Tan Pai Shou is a "door open" move. There are many possibilities after that (if you don't restrict yourself only in the striking world).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is not only about striking.

[YouKnowWho]

Tan sao is a punching concept, often mistaken as a can opener, a low five , a qi transporter, a begging hand out side the local bodega , omnipotent defense posture ( not ) by Hendrik.

The way that I look at Tan Shou can be a

- block,
- uppercut, or
- arm wrap.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is not only about striking.
That's why we should look into all usege of the Tan Pai Shou. You can use it to achieve clinching (obtain 2 contact points) if you want to.

[k gledhill]

The way that I look at Tan Shou can be a

- block,
- uppercut, or
- arm wrap.


That's why we should look into all usege of the Tan Pai Shou. You can use it to achieve clinching (obtain 2 contact points) if you want to.

Subjectivity allows a myriad of applications. Simple ideas can be lost in translation. Why not just invent something on your own and leave tan sao concepts and tactics to us. Wait ! You did, my bad.

[wingchunIan]

Subjectivity allows a myriad of applications. Simple ideas can be lost in translation. Why not just invent something on your own and leave tan sao concepts and tactics to us. Wait ! You did, my bad.

Not saying I agree with the grappling ideas posted by YKW but it would appear Kev yours is the only lineage from the multitude of lineages (including the rest of the WSL lines) that has such a narrow view of tan sao. I completely agree that things can and do get lost in translation but that is universally true and no single lineage can claim to be immune.

[Phil Redmond]

The difference is that the first two clips are dealing with countering how a hook is actually done by someone with some skill and the WC clip is showing how to counter a "hay maker".
You beat me to it. Those weren't "hooks" in the first clip. They were too open.

[Graham H]

Tan sao is a punching concept, often mistaken as a can opener,

Priceless! ;)

[Graham H]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is not only about striking.

Yes it is! :eek:

[Graham H]

that has such a narrow view of tan sao.

The narrower the better! You have many ideas on Tan Sau? Maybe I should come to your school. Oh wait! We already talked about that :)

[Graham H]

The way that I look at Tan Shou can be a

- block,
- uppercut, or
- arm wrap.


That's why we should look into all usege of the Tan Pai Shou. You can use it to achieve clinching (obtain 2 contact points) if you want to.

The way you are looking at it is incorrect.

[wingchunIan]

The narrower the better! You have many ideas on Tan Sau? Maybe I should come to your school. Oh wait! We already talked about that :)

No Graham, I don't think we have discussed that. If its a genuine offer to meet as intelligent adults then I'd welcome the opportunity to meet and exchange ideas, hopefully I'd learn something ( I have a firm belief that every one I ever train with can teach me something if I'm willing to learn and the day I stop learning is the day I stop training) but it wouldn't be at my school as that time is devoted to the students.
As far as tan sau is concerned, no I don't have many ideas on tan sau I have a single concept, it is a shape with a defined position and inherent strengths and weaknesses, it covers a given area. It can however be used in a variety of ways dependent upon how it is combined with footwork and depending upon what the partner / opponent is doing. To suggest that it is only a punching concept is IMO limiting as it has many uses, a view which seems to be shared by the most of the Wing Chun world including WSL followers such as DP whose clip was posted earlier in the thread. I am also curious as to why you would use tan sao to teach a punching concept when you can simple teach people to punch and use punches to teach a punching concept?

[Graham H]

No Graham, I don't think we have discussed that. If its a genuine offer to meet as intelligent adults then I'd welcome the opportunity to meet and exchange ideas, hopefully I'd learn something ( I have a firm belief that every one I ever train with can teach me something if I'm willing to learn and the day I stop learning is the day I stop training) but it wouldn't be at my school as that time is devoted to the students.
As far as tan sau is concerned, no I don't have many ideas on tan sau I have a single concept, it is a shape with a defined position and inherent strengths and weaknesses, it covers a given area. It can however be used in a variety of ways dependent upon how it is combined with footwork and depending upon what the partner / opponent is doing. To suggest that it is only a punching concept is IMO limiting as it has many uses, a view which seems to be shared by the most of the Wing Chun world including WSL followers such as DP whose clip was posted earlier in the thread. I am also curious as to why you would use tan sao to teach a punching concept when you can simple teach people to punch and use punches to teach a punching concept?

Oh lighten up FFS! You're too serious!

As you may have noticed David Peterson is not my Teacher. His thinking is different than that of my Teacher. The why's and what for's are not important.

Tan Sau is just a shape. It is not an application. The elbow is low and the hand is open purely so that one can focus on the elbow during training. The reason for this focus on the elbow is due to the un-naturalness of the Ving Tsun straight punch and the fact that we have to use the elbow for defending, opening the way for the punch and also the punch itself. This is not a natural thing for humans to do so Tan Sau develops this idea. The reason why this concept has been lost and grossly misinterpreted by people such as Ip Chun is due to the problems that arose during the time Ip Man was teaching. Many people such as your Sigung were not taught properly if at all by their Master. Unfortunately Ving Tsun cannot be taught or passed on properly by people that do not have the correct thinking and/or whos knowledge has filtered through form unworthy sources.

If I were to watch you train Tan Sau in SLT and you weren't to explain the correct ideas behind it I could invent many things and I would guess that my first thought would be that it is for blocking. It looks nothing like a punch when you are stood there slowly pushing it forward. If I were to watch you play chi sau and looked at your Tan Sau shape I would guess that it was for controlling your arm. This is a natural and common mistake.

WSL did not re-invent the whole system and nor did Philipp Bayer. The reason for all the different ideas on this fundamental concept is that people in the past have got it wrong and then the problem spreads like wildfire.

I would be happy to meet up with you but you better be ready for fighting because I won't be touching your arms or playing any chi sau with you. In my lineage we know what works and the only way to test is to spar. Talking comes afterwards. If you can make your Ip Chun/Shawn Rawcliffe ideas work then maybe I will join your school. ;)

Most of the people I meet in Ving tsun have come from other lineages so we are well aware of why the system is so f***ed up.

[Graham H]

You can inbox me if you like otherwise the chest beating will undoubtedly get harder as it usually does on this forum. No need for it.

[GlennR]

You can inbox me if you like otherwise the chest beating will undoubtedly get harder as it usually does on this forum. No need for it.

Too right Graham...... wouldnt be like you to encourage chest beating!

[Graham H]

Too right Graham...... wouldnt be like you to encourage chest beating!

Shut it Glenn you muppet! xx

[wingchunIan]

No chest beating from me, I'll leave that to others. I'm far too old for that nonsense.



WSL did not re-invent the whole system and nor did Philipp Bayer. The reason for all the different ideas on this fundamental concept is that people in the past have got it wrong and then the problem spreads like wildfire.
Not accusing anyone of reinventing anything. I just struggle with the idea that everyone else got it wrong, Ip Man's other students and WSL's other students etc

I would be happy to meet up with you but you better be ready for fighting because I won't be touching your arms or playing any chi sau with you. In my lineage we know what works and the only way to test is to spar.
I'd love to understand what you mean when you say sparring (as it means lots of things to lots of people), I've seen what Alan Orr does and I've seen the Leung Ting stuff, but I haven't seen any sparring clips from the PB lineage any chance you could point me to something on the web or post something


Talking comes afterwards. If you can make your Ip Chun/Shawn Rawcliffe ideas work then maybe I will join your school. ;) Nah we're very selective about who we let in :p

[Graham H]

Not accusing anyone of reinventing anything. I just struggle with the idea that everyone else got it wrong, Ip Man's other students and WSL's other students etc

Not everyone else but the likes of Leung Ting definately have doctored it all as he did with that famous photograph :)


I'd love to understand what you mean when you say sparring (as it means lots of things to lots of people), I've seen what Alan Orr does and I've seen the Leung Ting stuff, but I haven't seen any sparring clips from the PB lineage any chance you could point me to something on the web or post something

Sparring as in we both have an exchange. There are no sparring clips on the web. All the forms, drills and training methods are a precursor to sparring. A student has to be proficient in these before he can spar or there will be many problems. Why do you need a website? You can find out easy enough in real life. You cannot gauge ones conditioning from video clips.

Alan Orr is doing his own thing and it's nothing like what I do. Those guys are training for competitions where as I am not. I don't practice MMA and am not a member of an MMA gym.


Nah we're very selective about who we let in :p

LOL

[trubblman]

Yes it is! :eek:

More detail is needed to justify the proposition that VT is only about striking. I have heard VT sifus assert that Yip Man was very good at using controlling techniques with VT. Seeing that people claim VT doesnt contain techniques per se why should people limit themselves to striking? Certainly fighting is not limited to striking.

[JPinAZ]

Tan Sau is just a shape. It is not an application. The elbow is low and the hand is open purely so that one can focus on the elbow during training. The reason for this focus on the elbow is due to the un-naturalness of the Ving Tsun straight punch and the fact that we have to use the elbow for defending, opening the way for the punch and also the punch itself. This is not a natural thing for humans to do so Tan Sau develops this idea. The reason why this concept has been lost and grossly misinterpreted by people such as Ip Chun is due to the problems that arose during the time Ip Man was teaching. Many people such as your Sigung were not taught properly if at all by their Master. Unfortunately Ving Tsun cannot be taught or passed on properly by people that do not have the correct thinking and/or whos knowledge has filtered through form unworthy sources.

Just my 2 cents:
Sure, tan sau can be looked at as just a shape (it IS a technique!), but it has distinct functions that are different than a punch and there are only a small few groups/individuals that view tan sau as only a punching concept like this. I haven't heard it from any other Ip Man teachers outside this small group.

Having trained a non-IM lineage for the past 10 years, this idea of 'a tan is [only] a punch' also doesn't make much sense (except maybe to say that both tan and a punch have elbow in and fwd energy). In HFY we have 5 very distinct functions for tan sau. None of them are the same as a punch - contact points, ranges, facing, points of leverage, energies etc can very depending on which one is being used. The opening of the hand in application allows different parts of the arm to engage the bridge for leverage and spreading purposes (one example). Corkscrewing is another function of taan sau application that you don't typically see with a punch.

If it helps you and those you train with to develop elbow position for a punch, that fine. But to assume everyone else is wrong is both uneducated and pretty much rediculous. Hell, doesn't a punch develop the elbow position for a punch? Why an extra tool when you can just train a punch to train a punch? ;)
Even the translation of Tan Sau tells us it's more than just a punch! Maybe it's you who doesn't understand the true function or usage of a tan sau as everyone else seems to. So isn't it also possible it's the small group you are training with who were duped or didn't understand? :p

[Vajramusti]

Graham H says after quoting yours truly:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vajramusti View Post
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is not only about striking. (Joy)



Yes it is! (Graham)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Graham underestimates the depth and the breadth of the art.

I have no idea whether this due to Graham's limits or his current teacher's understanding...
but it does not matter.

Tan sou is not a shape- it's a motion and a concept- one of three seeds of win chun.
It performs (as do the other two seeds)a variety of functions besides providing foundations for striking.

If you look at Ip Ching's little book about his father- I am not commenting on Ip Ching's own skill-

in a challenge match before an audience in Foshan Ip Man accepted the challenge of an accomplished practitoner of another style who was visiting Foshan. Ip Man on the stage had his back to the audience. When the other man attacked- Ip man with a lop sao motion, threw the other man towards the audience and the man crash landed on a table.End of fight.

[k gledhill]

Graham H says after quoting yours truly:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vajramusti View Post
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing chun is not only about striking. (Joy)



Yes it is! (Graham)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Graham underestimates the depth and the breadth of the art.

I have no idea whether this due to Graham's limits or his current teacher's understanding...
but it does not matter.

Tan sou is not a shape- it's a motion and a concept- one of three seeds of win chun.
It performs (as do the other two seeds)a variety of functions besides providing foundations for striking.

If you look at Ip Ching's little book about his father- I am not commenting on Ip Ching's own skill-

in a challenge match before an audience in Foshan Ip Man accepted the challenge of an accomplished practitoner of another style who was visiting Foshan. Ip Man on the stage had his back to the audience. When the other man attacked- Ip man with a lop sao motion, threw the other man towards the audience and the man crash landed on a table.End of fight.


Joy an arm shape can easily be misinterpreted. Even by you ; )

[WC1277]

Joy an arm shape can easily be misinterpreted. Even by you ; )

It's not nor ever has been an arm shape. It's a concept. Those who make it an arm shape are already shackled to a technique. There is training and there is fighting. Period. For some reason, the near sighted view "testing" as the only true gauge while those who understand learning and teaching view "testing" different from fighting. One cannot predict their plight, but one can predict their "control". Different words for the same thing. PB crowd calls it striking. Just a description for the application. Others call it control. Just a description for the training that ultimately makes it striking. Control of ones self, learning through "CONCEPTS", that ultimately leads to "striking". That's Wing Chun. Nothing less, nothing more....

[Graham H]

I have heard VT sifus assert that Yip Man was very good at using controlling techniques with VT.

I've heard many things that are not true as well.

[Graham H]

Even the translation of Tan Sau tells us it's more than just a punch! Maybe it's you who doesn't understand the true function or usage of a tan sau as everyone else seems to. So isn't it also possible it's the small group you are training with who were duped or didn't understand? :p

Perhaps but maybe it's you. Who knows? Not you that's for sure.

If my Teacher was duped then so was WSL. Maybe even Ip Man was duped as he seems to have taught 1000 different variations of a system that is supposed to be simple, efficient and direct.

Does it really matter?

If you are the one that has all the correct ideas with your 5 tan saus then I should probably stop training because its a pretty poor concept.

[Graham H]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1217226]Graham H says after quoting yours truly:


Quote:
Graham underestimates the depth and the breadth of the art.

I have no idea whether this due to Graham's limits or his current teacher's understanding...
but it does not matter.

Tan sou is not a shape- it's a motion and a concept- one of three seeds of win chun.
It performs (as do the other two seeds)a variety of functions besides providing foundations for striking.

If you look at Ip Ching's little book about his father- I am not commenting on Ip Ching's own skill-

in a challenge match before an audience in Foshan Ip Man accepted the challenge of an accomplished practitoner of another style who was visiting Foshan. Ip Man on the stage had his back to the audience. When the other man attacked- Ip man with a lop sao motion, threw the other man towards the audience and the man crash landed on a table.End of fight.



If I had to choose between your thinking on Ving Tsun and no Ving Tsun at all I would stop today Joy. I've been down the Fong road.

I haven't met Fong personally but I have trained with people that have and I wasn't impressed. You say that I do not understand the breadth of the system and that's because yours is full of too much stuff that doesn't work IMO.

At least with PB his conditioning is something to be observed. His system makes sense. Everything in the forms, chi sau and weapons all compliment each other so there are no questions or uncertainties and we train harder than any other lineage I have been in. What more would I want?

We both put our faith in our Teachers and Sigungs and yet we have different ideas on the system. One of us is wrong mate. Who could it be? Lets contact Mulder and Scully and whilst they are around they can tell what the f**k you are talking about half the time :D

[Graham H]

Another thing is you always talk about things that happened before you were around. How can you know? You weren't there. How can any of us know. It's all bol***

We are fools for believing it all I guess :rolleyes:

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Graham H;1217284][
I haven't met Fong personally but I have trained with people that have and I wasn't impressed.
-----------------------------------------------------

Who is trying to impress you- not me. Fong sifu has no school in the UK.
Also- your comments on history is mindless. There is bad, good and run of the mill history.
You do not have to be present to get a sense of truth. You were not an aware observer of your own birth. You rely indirectly on evidence.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=LFJ;1217305]WSL taught the taan-da WSL also made YM's more simple.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Your opinion.

[Graham H]

Lmao. Keep up the good work guys :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

WSL taught the taan-da against round punches, which Graham maintains doesn't work. There are several photographs to prove it in DP's book and by his own teachings which are an inheritance of WSL's method- probably as close as you can get to a clear and unaltered communication of WSL's method, according to WSL himself. Not to mention other students of WSL who teach it.

So it is known WSL taught different uses of the taan-sau, as most importantly a concept but also a technique which can be applied as is. It would thus appear that PB's interpretation of VT is the result of his own development, or simplification. Not a bad thing! He made it more simple than what WSL taught, apparently. WSL also made YM's more simple. His goal was always that- a more efficient means of winning a fight. So if PB has achieved that effectively, then great.

Why don't you go and ask PB yourself instead of clutching at straws peanut?

[Graham H]

Fong sifu has no school in the UK..

That's strange Joy because I know of two that claim to be :confused:

[WC1277]

That's strange Joy because I know of two that claim to be :confused:

Doesn't work that way with Fong Sifu just like it didn't with Ip Man. There are no designated representatives in the UK. There's no where, just ones who he feels have a good understanding of his system. Currently, those people are NOT in the UK.

[Vajramusti]

Lmao. Keep up the good work guys :rolleyes:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoever-I don't put them down- they may have come to a seminar or two.

[Graham H]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoever-I don't put them down- they may have come to a seminar or two.

Well maybe you should inform Augustine that there are a people that are marketing themselves as teaching his system who regularly go to seminars in Tuscon. I payed one of them for private tuition back when I was a pup.

Anyway what does it matter? Ive come to realize that Wing Chun is full of fruit cakes so I wouldn't expect anything less.

[trubblman]

I've heard many things that are not true as well.

Of course trying to separate whats true and whats false is difficult. But again theres no proof supporting the principle that VT is about striking and striking only.

[Graham H]

Of course trying to separate whats true and whats false is difficult. But again theres no proof supporting the principle that VT is about striking and striking only.

So enlighten me as to what else it is for. Everything in Ving Tsun is for striking and trying to render you opponent unable to continue. How else can this be achieved?

Maybe dim mak or some chi can save the day.:rolleyes:

Maybe you can shoot lightning from your fingertips like that guy in Big Trouble in Little China in which case no need for Ving Tsun. :)

[trubblman]

So enlighten me as to what else it is for. Everything in Ving Tsun is for striking and trying to render you opponent unable to continue. How else can this be achieved?

Maybe dim mak or some chi can save the day.:rolleyes:

Maybe you can shoot lightning from your fingertips like that guy in Big Trouble in Little China in which case no need for Ving Tsun. :)

Save your snarkiness for teenagers. Its not impressive to grown folks. There are VT techniques I discern for seizing and throwing and limb destruction as well as counters to those techniques. Lets take one instance - right in Chum Kiu, u clearly see a 2 handed limb destruction technique.

[Niersun]

There must be several other threads discussing the same issue.

Your gonna get hit in a fight or sparring match. Learn to take a hit and Deal with it or you can be like Hendrik and cut your own testicles off in search of mystical power and research old chinese fictional kung fu kids novels for new fighting ideas.

If you dont want to get hit, then dont fight and practise the art of running instead.

Just because you get hit, doesnt mean the technique is bad.

[Graham H]

right in Chum Kiu, u clearly see a 2 handed limb destruction technique.

You think you see that but that is not what it is for and i will be as sarky as I like.

[Graham H]

Apologies. It's not for that in my system. You can use it for what you like. If you think that chum kiu is for arm destruction LOL then that's fine by me sweet heart x

[JPinAZ]

Perhaps but maybe it's you. Who knows? Not you that's for sure.

If my Teacher was duped then so was WSL. Maybe even Ip Man was duped as he seems to have taught 1000 different variations of a system that is supposed to be simple, efficient and direct.

Does it really matter?

If you are the one that has all the correct ideas with your 5 tan saus then I should probably stop training because its a pretty poor concept.

What's interesting is you don't have any comments regarding any of the technical info I provided - just some snide remarks that mean little to me. Even among the different WSL guys there's differing oppions on what you're saying. So if there is confusion even on this one thing among the students of WSL, how can you be so sure you've got the 'right' way among them.... :rolleyes: (hope you are seeing the point here about the stupidity of arguing about who's right based on who got what from whom..)

What I really appreciate about the system I train in, there is no 'he said/she said' second guessing. No 'sifu showed it this way' - the answers come directly from the checks & balances built into the system. It's not about me being correct or not, it's about what works and what doesn't from an understanding of space, structure, leverage, contact points, position/facing, energy on the bridge etc from a system perspective - not someone's interpretation of what some teacher told them.
And by saying this, I'm not saying one way is better or more right, just that there is no need to argue about who sifu gave 'the real stuff' too if one understands the core system concepts & principles...

Now, if you want to simplify the system to the point that everything is just a punch, who am I to argue? In that case, there is no right wrong, just what is right for you. Same goes if you feel you need to take away all the technology behind tan sau to make it just another training tool to train punching (even when training a punch already does that) :rolleyes:, makes no difference to me.
The rub is when you come here with your 'interpretations' and try to correct others when you obviously don't know a dam thing about what they are doing - you just come off as rediculous, as well as plain old ignorant.

That said, if want to have a discussion about the actual technology of taan sau as I let on in my last post from a logic/system/application perspective, or even how you feel I have it 'wrong', I'm open to that. But if you are just going to come back with more he-said/"sifu says", don't bother - it's just a waste of everyone's time to discuss what one person felt might have been 'more right; even when his own students still argue about it anyway.

[Graham H]

Even among the different WSL guys there's differing oppions on what you're saying. So if there is confusion even on this one thing among the students of WSL, how can you be so sure you've got the 'right' way among them.... :rolleyes:

Because I have tried them first hand.

Bye Bye

[JPinAZ]

Because I have tried them first hand.

Bye Bye

Yup, good talk :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

Yup, good talk :rolleyes:

Hold on. Now you think I am lying? You tit :D