WSL in 1984

[BPWT]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAji8IZig90&feature=player_embedded

A clip that was new to me.

Students first, then WSL from 2:00 onwards.

[GlennR]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAji8IZig90&feature=player_embedded

A clip that was new to me.

Students first, then WSL from 2:00 onwards.

Oh dear, where do we start.......... let me finish dinner and ill comment ;)

[GlennR]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAji8IZig90&feature=player_embedded

A clip that was new to me.

Students first, then WSL from 2:00 onwards.

So......

Tall guy in white t-shirt dominates short guy in the 1st 2 minutes through use of better technique but, importantly, longer range due to height and length of arms.

2 minute mark, WSL steps in, is similar height to 1st guy that was dominated by the same whit t-shirt guy, and uses the bridge (ie arm contact) to overcome the range advantage of the whit t-shirt guy

Thoughts PBWSLVT guys??

[BPWT]

2 minute mark, WSL steps in, is similar height to 1st guy that was dominated by the same whit t-shirt guy, and uses the bridge (ie arm contact) to overcome the range advantage of the whit t-shirt guy

Same thoughts as me. WSL negates the other guy's longer reach by keeping the distance and not disengaging - that is to say WSL attacks and maintains contact/stick with his non-attacking arm, and therefore maintains much more control than that seen between the two students working with each other.

Nice of David Peterson to be so generous with his archive of WSL video. :)

[Paddington]

A great clip. I do see a lot of similarity in the way PB rolls, from the limited clips I have seen on youtube, so I am also interested to hear what PB students think about this clip.

[LFJ]

Short guy was not managing distance well, staying in a range where he could not reach his partner but his partner could reach him; no LSJC. WSL stepped in to show him a few entry tactics to get in on the taller guy and negate his reach advantage. Maintaining contact in order to control has nothing to do with it. This kind of contact is happening because they are doing a chi-sau drill. The important points being shown are how he uses his whole body to pressure forward (LSJC) and cuts the angles to move in and change the odds in his favor. Don't focus too much on the in-between. That won't be there in a fight.

[BPWT]

Short guy was not managing distance well, staying in a range where he could not reach his partner but his partner could reach him; no LSJC. WSL stepped in to show him a few entry tactics to get in on the taller guy and negate his reach advantage. Maintaining contact in order to control has nothing to do with it. This kind of contact is happening because they are doing a chi-sau drill. The important points being shown are how he uses his whole body to pressure forward (LSJC) and cuts the angles to move in and change the odds in his favor. Don't focus too much on the in-between. That won't be there in a fight.

Certainly I agree on the importance of using the whole body to pressure forward. But I agree less with the idea that maintaining contact doesn't aid in the control WSL exhibits... in this short clip it shows how it shuts down one half of potential countering options.

[LFJ]

From the perspective of what's actually going to happen in a fight, that has nothing to do with it.

[BPWT]

From the perspective of what's actually going to happen in a fight, that has nothing to do with it.

Maybe... :D

[k gledhill]

Chi sao clip. Seen it before. Please tell me you don't think that's the sparring.

[k gledhill]

Certainly I agree on the importance of using the whole body to pressure forward. But I agree less with the idea that maintaining contact doesn't aid in the control WSL exhibits... in this short clip it shows how it shuts down one half of potential countering options.

It's a drilling method. An abstract drill with mutual benefits.

[BPWT]

It's a drilling method. An abstract drill with mutual benefits.

Yes. But seriously, whenever there's a clip presented of WSL Chi Sau (or from anyone else for that matter) do we need to say that it's a training method? We all know that this is not sparring and not fighting. And as such, as a training method, it will surely have mutual benefits for each person taking part.

No need for this disclaimer, IMO.

But in a drill like this, each person has the chance to initiate an attack and to work a counter-attack, no? It did say 'Gwoh Sau' at the start of the clip.

Either way, you can clearly see that WSL finds a line to attack/enter on and is often, at that moment, using his other hand to restrict possible counters.

For sure, in a fight there will not be this prolonged contact - indeed, you wouldn't be issuing a single attack like this - but I think the clip shows well the idea that maintaining contact (even if actually utilized only for a brief period) has an important function.

I liked also how WSL used his footwork in the final moments of the footage to step directly into the other guy's stance. Common in quite a few lineages, but I think I remember reading somewhere on this forum that this was not something WSLVT did (but I could be wrong on this point).

Anyways, like I said - it was a new clip for me, and it was interesting to watch.

[k gledhill]

Yes. But seriously, whenever there's a clip presented of WSL Chi Sau (or from anyone else for that matter) do we need to say that it's a training method? We all know that this is not sparring and not fighting. And as such, as a training method, it will surely have mutual benefits for each person taking part.

No need for this disclaimer, IMO.

But in a drill like this, each person has the chance to initiate an attack and to work a counter-attack, no? It did say 'Gwoh Sau' at the start of the clip.

Either way, you can clearly see that WSL finds a line to attack/enter on and is often, at that moment, using his other hand to restrict possible counters.

For sure, in a fight there will not be this prolonged contact - indeed, you wouldn't be issuing a single attack like this - but I think the clip shows well the idea that maintaining contact (even if actually utilized only for a brief period) has an important function.

I liked also how WSL used his footwork in the final moments of the footage to step directly into the other guy's stance. Common in quite a few lineages, but I think I remember reading somewhere on this forum that this was not something WSLVT did (but I could be wrong on this point).

Anyways, like I said - it was a new clip for me, and it was interesting to watch.

Abstract ideas at work to develop many things.

[GlennR]

Short guy was not managing distance well, staying in a range where he could not reach his partner but his partner could reach him; no LSJC

Agreed, though the other guys skill level looked a bit better IMO

.
WSL stepped in to show him a few entry tactics to get in on the taller guy and negate his reach advantage.

And maintained contact everytime...... wether he meant to or not.

Maintaining contact in order to control has nothing to do with it. This kind of contact is happening because they are doing a chi-sau drill.

Then why do it?


The important points being shown are how he uses his whole body to pressure forward (LSJC) and cuts the angles to move in and change the odds in his favor.

He also uses hos whole body to create pressure at the bridge.... a lot


Don't focus too much on the in-between. That won't be there in a fight.


So we ignore those pesky arms do we??

[Paddington]

Abstract ideas at work to develop many things.

No offense Kev but you are starting to sound like the oracle at Delphi!

[LFJ]

And maintained contact everytime...... wether he meant to or not.

Sure. That's the format of the drill. But drilling is not fighting.

Yes, BPWT, that has to be repeated often because people don't get the point.


Then why do it?

Chi-sau organically sets up various situations of obstructions and how to act in a mutually developmental drill. Each one would be a mere millisecond in time in an actual fight. No prolonged contact as in a drill.


So we ignore those pesky arms do we??

Not exactly, but do you try to pun-sau in a fight or something?

[sihing]

If you notice also, WSL has long forearms, almost equal to the taller guy, and he uses push/pull to set things up..this makes a difference IMO. It's not just a matter of height, but also the dimensions of the limbs too.

In allot of VT vids, the main guy uses set ups to get things in like push/pull, cover, or changing sides quickly, then hitting to get a point in like a tourney or something,,,someone that has good LSJC can negate most of these set ups, but again if the other guy is too good you can't do much in chi sau to "beat"/overcome him..in the first part, the taller guy is just bigger with longer reach, the other shorter guy even though maybe just as skilled, how do you get in on someone with larger physicality and same skill?? Two people playing the same game, bigger guy usually wins..

For me this is just challenging the skill set, we need someone else with similar skill sets to test things out, nothing will work outright perfect in this scenario, but it can test weakness in frame, line or stiffness, among other things too. Lapp sau is good for this as well, and allows us to free spar while maintaining VT frame, and a prelude to non contacted sparring in my experience.

J

[GlennR]

Sure. That's the format of the drill. But drilling is not fighting.

So you guys keep saying


Chi-sau organically sets up various situations of obstructions and how to act in a mutually developmental drill. Each one would be a mere millisecond in time in an actual fight. No prolonged contact as in a drill.

Organically?? Nice word!

Sorry, but you assume to much, who's to say it will last a millisecond?
And if it doesnt?
I assume contact remains and another solution is sought.... ie what you see in the clip


Not exactly, but do you try to pun-sau in a fight or something?

Well no, bu, you guys seem to deny that maintained contact may happen.... i disagree unless you chi-blast their arms to another dimension

[BPWT]

Contact might be for milli-seconds, a second, a few seconds... the point is that contact (whether 'touch and go' or for slightly longer) shows you the way and helps you 'seal'.

It is one of the reasons Poon Sau starts off proceedings with both arms in contact/bridged.

It's a progressive training device.

Lap Sau: a cycle working a single bridge
Poon Sau: a cycle working double bridge
Lat Sau: a device to work entries from a no-bridge state

[LFJ]

Organically?? Nice word!

;):cool: Don't have that one is Aussieland?


Sorry, but you assume to much, who's to say it will last a millisecond?
And if it doesnt?
I assume contact remains and another solution is sought.... ie what you see in the clip

Well again, what you see in the clip is not a fight. If you are scared and tense up you will maintain contact and even grapple your opponent. If you are bold and proactive you will just punch.


Well no, bu, you guys seem to deny that maintained contact may happen.... i disagree unless you chi-blast their arms to another dimension

That's exactly what I do.

[GlennR]

:cool: Don't have that one is Aussieland?

No, we dont get to learn big words, to busy riding our kangaroos


Well again, what you see in the clip is not a fight. If you are scared and tense up you will maintain contact and even grapple your opponent. If you are bold and proactive you will just punch.

And what if he engages you via contact and you cant "just punch"?

[LFJ]

to busy riding our kangaroos

I want one! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uca_CKuTHQc


And what if he engages you via contact and you cant "just punch"?

Then I punch him.

[Graham H]

And what if he engages you via contact and you cant "just punch"?

What would a boxer do Glenn?

[Frost]

I want one! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uca_CKuTHQc



Then I punch him.

So if a thai boxer grabs you because he is so scared he doesnt want to hit you unattached, or if an MMA fighter isnt bold and proactive but tenses up and grabs you you will just hit him totally ingoring the hold........

[LFJ]

unless you chi-blast their arms to another dimension

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-fL8zopddI

[Frost]

What would a boxer do Glenn?

dirty box and hit out of the clinch :)

[Graham H]

dirty box and hit out of the clinch :)

That's a better idea than most Wing Chun theories! ;)

[LFJ]

So if a thai boxer grabs you because he is so scared he doesnt want to hit you unattached, or if an MMA fighter isnt bold and proactive but tenses up and grabs you you will just hit him totally ingoring the hold........

If any kind of fighter is too scared to be bold and proactive he will not be given the chance to grab me because I will punch him.

[Frost]

If any kind of fighter is too scared to be bold and proactive he will not be given the chance to grab me because I will punch him.

I see sarcasm does not translate well over the net
What if the fighter isn’t scared, he just wants to hold you dispute your balance and knee the cr&p out of you because he knows its a better strategy that just punching for him, or he wants to dump you on your head, are you going to continue chain punching him or do something else :)

[LFJ]

I see sarcasm does not translate well over the net
What if the fighter isn’t scared, he just wants to hold you dispute your balance and knee the cr&p out of you because he knows its a better strategy that just punching for him, or he wants to dump you on your head, are you going to continue chain punching him or do something else :)

Didn't say anything about chain punching.

[Graham H]

I see sarcasm does not translate well over the net
What if the fighter isn’t scared, he just wants to hold you dispute your balance and knee the cr&p out of you because he knows its a better strategy that just punching for him, or he wants to dump you on your head, are you going to continue chain punching him or do something else :)

It's not possible to know or predict what will happen in a fight although Wing Chun guys like to talk a good game most of which will fail IMO. :)

[Frost]

Didn't say anything about chain punching.

so you would do something else, do tell :)

[Frost]

It's not possible to know or predict what will happen in a fight although Wing Chun guys like to talk a good game most of which will fail IMO. :)

true but most people will have a general idea about how they would handle the situation, and most of us will have seen what happens when you simply try to punch in that situation :)

[Graham H]

true but most people will have a general idea about how they would handle the situation, and most of us will have seen what happens when you simply try to punch in that situation :)

There are too many factors in fighting that can determine the outcome to even consider trying to discuss it.

[LFJ]

I employ a tactical punching method overall, but that is not to be confused with just chain punching, which can suggest blind fury. As Graham says, there's not much use in laying out a game plan for specific situations as fighting is unpredictable. If you are trying to apply a specific response, you are thinking, and when things change there's no time to be trying to apply things you have in mind.

[GlennR]

What would a boxer do Glenn?

Good question my old chum.

But ill start by saying, IMO, what WC has to do... and that is engage at close range, and thats what leads to the "chi-sao scenario"

And the reason it has to is that it has one primary weapon..... the straight line punch.

IMO, the whole system is based about delivering this punch both in a positional aspect and with a view to maximise power delivery.

Its a great idea, focus on one weapon, become adept at delivering it, its structurally very sound and lessens the chance of injuring the hand. Thats why we focus on that range, its the only range that punch works in, give or take a few inches

Boxing, for good or bad, doesnt have those limitations. You can deliver from various ranges, you can punch off your toes or from low down in a crouch, you can punch straight, over, under and around both sides of you opponent.

It has a much bigger arsenal.

So to answer your question, there's a lot you could do. A few might be;

- simply jab out

- Crouch, turn the left shoulder in and uppercut with the right (fav of mine)

- step to the left, firing of the left hook as you do

- clinch and dirty box as Frost said

4 very different tactics for the same problem

[LFJ]

It has a much bigger arsenal.

I think a few things might be missing in your WC...

[Graham H]

Its a great idea, focus on one weapon, become adept at delivering it, its structurally very sound and lessens the chance of injuring the hand. Thats why we focus on that range, its the only range that punch works in, give or take a few inches

I agree to a certain extent but we make very good use of po pai jeung, fak sau and the kick in my lineage. The Ving Tsun straight punch is the core element though.


Boxing, for good or bad, doesnt have those limitations. You can deliver from various ranges, you can punch off your toes or from low down in a crouch, you can punch straight, over, under and around both sides of you opponent.

I agree and this is what causes most Wing Chun serious problems and it's because of the chi sau bubble. We don't have this bubble, or at least not how it is in most lineages, in my lineage.


So to answer your question, there's a lot you could do. A few might be;

- simply jab out

- Crouch, turn the left shoulder in and uppercut with the right (fav of mine)

- step to the left, firing of the left hook as you do

- clinch and dirty box as Frost said

4 very different tactics for the same problem

Good work.

[Wayfaring]

Cool clip. You can see WSL's greater skill level in dealing with an opponent with longer reach. He uses the bridge to extend his opponent out, thus allowing an angle step and getting in to his opponent's COG.

So everybody is talking what a boxer would do. IMO a boxer would also attempt to draw his opponent out and get him to extend, yet with head movement and slipping punches. After a slipped punch a boxer also would be into his opponent's COG.

Different methods of achieving similar tactical results.

Oh, and LOL at those who don't train against a thai clinch or takedowns speculating what they would do in that scenario. What you would do is get kneed continuously or get taken down.

[guy b.]

I think a few things might be missing in your WC...

Hard to disagree that boxing is inherently more flexible in striking with the hands compared to wing chun surely? This is wing chun's weakness as well as its strength.

[LFJ]

Hard to disagree that boxing is inherently more flexible in striking with the hands compared to wing chun surely? This is wing chun's weakness as well as its strength.

I don't think so. It is a fighting sport, only allowed to strike with one part of the fist and only has a few punches applied at different levels and independently. It is just that wing chun focusses on one main tool, but it has much more and no such restrictions.

Glenn says boxing has a bigger arsenal because it is not limited by range and can throw in different ways from anywhere, whereas wing chun needs a certain range to use its one punch. But as Graham stated, we also make good use of po-paai-jeung, faak-sau, and various palms as well. Not to mention the kick, because of course wing chun is not restricted to hands only so we need not be made to compare hands to hands, because it will never be only hands vs hands since wing chun is not a game and doesn't play by any rules. Glenn was just comparing system for system anyway.

[Kellen Bassette]

Oh, and LOL at those who don't train against a thai clinch or takedowns speculating what they would do in that scenario. What you would do is get kneed continuously or get taken down.

The first time I was in a Thai clinch was like a revelation...I am a true believer now...:D

[YouKnowWho]

who don't train against a thai clinch or takedowns speculating what they would do in that scenario. What you would do is get kneed continuously or get taken down.

Time has changed. Our ancient WC masters didn't have to fight MT guys or wrestlers. Today a WC guy may have to deal with the "modern" challenge.

If Bill Gates still holds on his DOS, there would be no MS Window today.

[LFJ]

Time has changed. Our ancient WC masters didn't have to fight MT guys or wrestlers. Today a WC guy may have to deal with the "modern" challenge.

A few of the common clinch defenses people do anyway basically use WC shapes, such as laan-sau to brace across the face or bong-sau to pop the elbow up like a crowbar. Both of these allow you to get their arms off to where you can then strike or stay in and grapple if you prefer.

[GlennR]

I think a few things might be missing in your WC...

Not at all, the word i used was "primary"

[GlennR]

I don't think so. It is a fighting sport, only allowed to strike with one part of the fist and only has a few punches applied at different levels and independently.

Offered from various heights, at various ranges from various angles. WC doesnt have this in its punching arsenal, it relies on positioning to hit


It is just that wing chun focusses on one main tool, but it has much more and no such restrictions.


Restrictions? Its restricted within its own tool box of strikes, as is any style.


Glenn says boxing has a bigger arsenal because it is not limited by range and can throw in different ways from anywhere, whereas wing chun needs a certain range to use its one punch. But as Graham stated, we also make good use of po-paai-jeung, faak-sau, and various palms as well.

And these work at the range of the punch, and still basically goes straight to the opponent.


Not to mention the kick, because of course wing chun is not restricted to hands only so we need not be made to compare hands to hands, because it will never be only hands vs hands since wing chun is not a game and doesn't play by any rules. Glenn was just comparing system for system anyway.


Sure, it has the kicks and i find them crucial for succesful WC, having said that, theres on primary kick used most of the time..... just like the punch

[LFJ]

Offered from various heights, at various ranges from various angles. WC doesnt have this in its punching arsenal, it relies on positioning to hit

Good thing is, WC is not limited to its punching arsenal like boxing.


Restrictions? Its restricted within its own tool box of strikes, as is any style.

Rule restrictions such as what part of the hand you are allowed to strike with, not tactical restrictions, if you want to call it that, based on fight strategy. That's a difference between a sport and a combat system.


And these work at the range of the punch, and still basically goes straight to the opponent.

And? They also strike high and low, chop the nose and throat, strike two simultaneously, and so on. There are no rules restricting what they can do and the only restrictions they have are self-imposed for tactical purposes.


Sure, it has the kicks and i find them crucial for succesful WC, having said that, theres on primary kick used most of the time..... just like the punch

And? Again, for sound tactical reasons.

I don't see at all how WC could be more limited than boxing which has rules imposed upon it for restrictions in sporting competition. They aren't even in the same category until you extract boxing methods out of the sport, but even then boxing alone is not enough for standup fighting like WC.

[GlennR]

Rule restrictions such as what part of the hand you are allowed to strike with, not tactical restrictions, if you want to call it that, based on fight strategy. That's a difference between a sport and a combat system.


And the MMA guys do what to improve their striking?
And they can strike with whatever part of the hand they lik


And? They also strike high and low, chop the nose and throat, strike two simultaneously, and so on. There are no rules restricting what they can do and the only restrictions they have are self-imposed for tactical purposes.


And thas my point, WC wants to win the fight in a certain way, and with that in mind has mas the striaght ounch its primary weapon


I don't see at all how WC could be more limited than boxing which has rules imposed upon it for restrictions in sporting competition. They aren't even in the same category until you extract boxing methods out of the sport, but even then boxing alone is not enough for standup fighting like WC.


You are joking arent you???

[LFJ]

And thas my point, WC wants to win the fight in a certain way, and with that in mind has mas the striaght ounch its primary weapon

No. It just wants to win the fight. It contains a certain strategy believed to be the most effective and employs tactics to achieve the desired result. It has nothing to do with fighting a certain way because it likes the particular 'style'.

Btw, Is your keyboard alright?


You are joking arent you???

Okay, what is the boxing response to a takedown or even kick? That's right, nothing until you take it out of the sport that it is and at least add new strategy to it if not also technique.

[Frost]

No. It just wants to win the fight. It contains a certain strategy believed to be the most effective and employs tactics to achieve the desired result. It has nothing to do with fighting a certain way because it likes the particular 'style'.

Btw, Is your keyboard alright?



Okay, what is the boxing response to a takedown or even kick? That's right, nothing until you take it out of the sport that it is and at least add new strategy to it if not also technique.

is this a trick question? A boxers response is to impose his game on you so you can't kick or take him down, wing chuns answer is to avoid fighting and only do chi Sao or demo takedown defended against equally clueless class mates :-)

As for wing chuns strategy being effective I think the jury is still out on that one....

[GlennR]

No. It just wants to win the fight. It contains a certain strategy believed to be the most effective and employs tactics to achieve the desired result. It has nothing to do with fighting a certain way because it likes the particular 'style'.

Youre saying exactly what im trying to convey, WC has a belief in its strategy and has developed its arsenal around that.


Btw, Is your keyboard alright?


Last time i checked


Okay, what is the boxing response to a takedown or even kick?

Mmmmmmmm, shot in the dark........... maybe punches the other guy?


That's right, nothing until you take it out of the sport that it is and at least add new strategy to it if not also technique.


Right........ tell that to the countless boxers that have belted martial artists of all styles

[LFJ]

Jury? It's down to the individual and what they can do with it using it for what it's for; self-defense, not how many people have successfully used it in sporting competition. As WSL said; "combat experience is more important than any other thing". Whether a bunch of people use something successfully in competition or not has nothing to do with whether or not someone else can use it to fight.

[GlennR]

Whether a bunch of people use something successfully in competition or not has nothing to do with whether or not someone else can use it to fight.


You sure your keyboard is ok?????????

[LFJ]

Youre saying exactly what im trying to convey, WC has a belief in its strategy and has developed its arsenal around that.

You said WC wants to win a fight in a certain way. I don't believe so. It just wants to win the fight. There are instances where its 'rules' need to be broken, and that's fine. The point is to win the fight, not adhere to some 'style'.

On the other hand, if a boxer hits with the wrong part of the fist, or with both hands simultaneously, or to the wrong target, they get warnings or penalized. The reason is because the goal is not to win a fight, but to win a game playing by the rules.

Do you acknowledge there's this difference or no?

[LFJ]

You sure your keyboard is ok?????????

Just fine. I'm saying those athletes are not you nor are their opponents yours, nor are you in the same situation in a fight. Their matches have nothing to do with you, your opponent, or your specific fight situation. You think it is the style above the fighter? I don't agree.

[guy b.]

LFJ is correct in that boxing is not a system of combat. It doesn't consider combat because it is a sport. Boxing doesn't have principles or a system to apply to fighting.

This is not to say that boxing punching is no use for combat- it can be depending on whether it is thought about and integrated into a coherent system.

LFJ is wrong in saying that boxing punching is not inherently more flexible than wing chun punching- it obviously is. He is answering a different question relating to the combat efficacy of the wing chun system which contains more than just punching as well as a particular systemic approach to the fight. While boxing punching is less constrained than wing chun punching, whether it is "better" is also a different question. Better for what, better used how? Wing chun punching is constrained for a reason. Boxing punching without gloves is quite dangerous to the user in my experience

[sanjuro_ronin]

Did someone just say that boxing is NOT a system of combat?

[guy b.]

Did someone just say that boxing is NOT a system of combat?

It isn't. It is a sport where the rules of the sport tend to substitute for fighting principles. Since sport rules do not map very well to reality it cannot be said to be a system of combat. Systems tend to apply specific assumptions and ideas to the problem of fighting which boxing does not do

[sanjuro_ronin]

It isn't. It is a sport where the rules of the sport tend to substitute for fighting principles. Since sport rules do not map very well to reality it cannot be said to be a system of combat. Systems tend to apply specific assumptions and ideas to the problem of fighting which boxing does not do

Please define system of combat for me.

[sanjuro_ronin]

com·bat (km-bt, kmbt)
v. com·bat·ed or com·bat·ted, com·bat·ing or com·bat·ting, com·bats
v.tr.
1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against. See Synonyms at oppose.
v.intr.
To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.
n. (kmbt)
Fighting, especially armed battle; strife. See Synonyms at conflict.
adj. (kmbt)
1. Of or relating to combat: flew 50 combat missions.
2. Intended for use or deployment in combat: combat boots; combat troops.


Combat or fighting is a purposeful violent conflict meant to weaken, or establish dominance over the opposition, or to kill the opposition, or drive the opposition away from a location where it is not wanted or needed.
The term combat (French for fight) typically refers to armed conflict between military forces in warfare, whereas the more general term "fighting" can refer to any violent conflict between individuals or nations. Combat violence can be unilateral, whereas fighting implies at least a defensive reaction. However, the terms are often used synonymously along with the term "Battle Ready". A large-scale fight is known as a battle.
Combat may take place under a specific set of rules or be unregulated. Examples of rules include the Geneva Conventions (covering the treatment of soldiers in war), medieval Chivalry, the Marquess of Queensberry rules (covering boxing) and several forms of combat sports.
Combat in war fare involves two or more opposing military organizations, usually fighting for nations at war (although guerrilla warfare and suppression of insurgencies can fall outside this definition). Warfare falls under the laws of war, which govern its purposes and conduct, and protect the rights of soldiers and non-combatants.
Combat may be armed (using weapons) or unarmed (not using weapons). Hand-to-hand combat (melee) is combat at very close range, attacking the opponent with the body (striking, kicking, strangling, etc.) and/or with a melee weapon (knives, swords, batons, etc.), as opposed to a ranged weapon.

[LFJ]

LFJ is wrong in saying that boxing punching is not inherently more flexible than wing chun punching- it obviously is. He is answering a different question relating to the combat efficacy of the wing chun system which contains more than just punching as well as a particular systemic approach to the fight.

That's why I didn't say anything comparing boxing vs wing chun punching, because I didn't accept that the two should be made to be compared since they are not in the same category. To isolate wing chun's punching and compare it to boxing you take it away from what it is, and you can't really do that or it's not wing chun. So I actually didn't make any such comparison. I only compared the two as wholes.

[sanjuro_ronin]

That's why I didn't say anything comparing boxing vs wing chun punching, because I didn't accept that the two should be made to be compared since they are not in the same category. To isolate wing chun's punching and compare it to boxing you take it away from what it is, and you can't really do that or it's not wing chun. So I actually didn't make any such comparison. I only compared the two as wholes.

You are right, boxing punching and WC punching are NOT in the same category.

[LFJ]

@sanjuro,

Without need for the detailed definition of 'combat system', I'm sure you can understand how a combat sport which works within imposed rules of the game differs from a combat system designed to survive unrestricted fighting where the intentional death or serious injury of you by your opponent may be very likely, no?

[sanjuro_ronin]

@sanjuro,

Without need for the detailed definition of 'combat system', I'm sure you can understand how a combat sport which works within imposed rules of the game differs from a combat system designed to survive unrestricted fighting where the intentional death or serious injury of you by your opponent may be very likely, no?

Really? this argument again?
Did we just go through a time machine or something?

Do you know what is to CORE "punching style" taught in virtually ALL military H2H systems?
I'll give you a clue, it isn't wing chun.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Maybe you guys should actually go to a boxing gym and LEARN boxing before you decide to "rule it out".

[guy b.]

Please define system of combat for me.


Already done in my previous posts.

Briefly a combat system is a holistic approach to fighting that makes certain particular assumptions about the best approach. Combat systems are coherent and principle based. Examples include wing chun (and most chinese MA) and brazillian jiu jitsu.

Combat sports are generally not combat systems because arbitrary rules tend to substitute for combat derived principles. There are some exceptions to this, for example bjj, epee fencing and kendo, which are sports with rules derived recently from combat systems. Bjj also still exists as a combat system. The rules of western MA (e.g. boxing and wrestling) are more arbitrary than some other combat sports and do not constitute an approach to actual fighting on their own. This is not to say they can't be useful in fighting- obviously they can

[guy b.]

Maybe you guys should actually go to a boxing gym and LEARN boxing before you decide to "rule it out".

Have done. Saying that boxing is not a combat system is not ruling it out, lol.

Military combatives is a combat system integrating boxing striking

[LFJ]

Do you know what is to CORE "punching style" taught in virtually ALL military H2H systems?
I'll give you a clue, it isn't wing chun.

And is boxing all they do for stand up fighting or do they need to add things to be most effective? That's my point. It's a game and needs to more to work outside of the rules of that game.


Maybe you guys should actually go to a boxing gym and LEARN boxing before you decide to "rule it out".

Didn't rule anything out. Boxing is good for what it is. If you want to bring it into fighting though, great, but I think you can't get along with boxing alone.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Have done. Saying that boxing is not a combat system is not ruling it out, lol.

Military combatives are a combat system integrating boxing striking

Yep and here is the thing, combat systems is a term that is sold to people that THING they are learning what soldiers are.
They are NOT.
Soldiers learn to kill:
We blow up first
We shoot second
We stab third
We "fist fight" as a very last resort.

A true combat system is one that deals with the COMBAT OF TODAY and in that regard, virtually NO MA is a combat system.


Boxers fight under a rule set, yes, BUT what they do is very easily "transfered" into the real world as all those that have every fought a trained boxer now ( and maple evidence on youtube can be seen).

[sanjuro_ronin]

And is boxing all they do for stand up fighting or do they need to add things to be most effective? That's my point. It's a game and needs to more to work outside of the rules of that game.



Didn't rule anything out. Boxing is good for what it is. If you want to bring it into fighting though, great, but I think you can't get along with boxing alone.


It can be argued that the same applies for WC.
Just saying.

[Frost]

It can be argued that the same applies for WC.
Just saying.

of course the big white elephant in the room is that despite what everyone is saying about boxing not being a combat art out of the two disciplines being talked about only 1 can provide countless clips of itself working on the street in real confrontations....and its not wing Chun

[LFJ]

It can be argued that the same applies for WC.
Just saying.

I think it's good on standup. All the necessary boxes are checked. If on the ground, sure some BJJ is a good compliment. But boxing as a standup alone? I don't think so.


of course the big white elephant in the room is that despite what everyone is saying about boxing not being a combat art out of the two disciplines being talked about only 1 can provide countless clips of itself working on the street in real confrontations....and its not wing Chun

Boxing is far more common to where the average street thug will know a little. So of course it will pop up everywhere. The same can't be expected of wing chun.

[Frost]

I think it's good on standup. All the necessary boxes are checked. If on the ground, sure some BJJ is a good compliment. But boxing as a standup alone? I don't think so.



Boxing is far more common to where the average street thug will know a little. So of course it will pop up everywhere. The same can't be expected of wing chun.

you are right its not like ita the second most popular kung du system im the world or anything........

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think it's good on standup. All the necessary boxes are checked. If on the ground, sure some BJJ is a good compliment. But boxing as a standup alone? I don't think so.



The likes of Rodney King would disagree with you in terms of "real World" and the likes of Demetrius Oaktree Edwards would disagree in terms of in the ring.
He beat Ross Scott to win the PKA Heavyweight title in 1980 with his boxing skills ( he was a pure boxer with just one kick, front kick).

[LFJ]

They're welcome to disagree. As I said it's down to the individual and what they can do with it in a given situation against a given opponent. But RK's "street boxing" employs tactics not allowed in traditional boxing. It's modified. And the competition faced in PKA is hardly less restricted. Pure sport boxing against an unrestricted and well-rounded fighter? I don't know anyone that confident/stupid.

[guy b.]

Yep and here is the thing, combat systems is a term that is sold to people that THING they are learning what soldiers are.


No, combat systems are just systematized principle based approaches to combat.


A true combat system is one that deals with the COMBAT OF TODAY and in that regard, virtually NO MA is a combat system.

It is impossible to identify the "combat of today"


Boxers fight under a rule set, yes, BUT what they do is very easily "transfered" into the real world as all those that have every fought a trained boxer now ( and maple evidence on youtube can be seen).

I don't think anyone is arguing that boxing can't be useful

[guy b.]

Some of the responses on this thread are hilarious.

Why on earth are you guys hanging around on a wing chun forum? Go off and do your boxing. Be happy instead of always negative!

[GlennR]

LFJ is correct in that boxing is not a system of combat. It doesn't consider combat because it is a sport. Boxing doesn't have principles or a system to apply to fighting.


Ive asked before and ill ask again, why does boxing wipe the floor with basically ever stand up MA in the planet?


This is not to say that boxing punching is no use for combat- it can be depending on whether it is thought about and integrated into a coherent system.


Mate, your obvious lack of boxing knowledge need to be addressed if you want to keep makingh statements about it.


LFJ is wrong in saying that boxing punching is not inherently more flexible than wing chun punching- it obviously is.

Correct.


He is answering a different question relating to the combat efficacy of the wing chun system which contains more than just punching as well as a particular systemic approach to the fight. While boxing punching is less constrained than wing chun punching, whether it is "better" is also a different question. Better for what, better used how? Wing chun punching is constrained for a reason.

All true. My point was that boxing has developed more strikes (hand) than WC due to what and how they are trying to achieve.


Boxing punching without gloves is quite dangerous to the user in my experience

I agree with that and mentioned it in an earlier thread

[GlennR]

That's why I didn't say anything comparing boxing vs wing chun punching, because I didn't accept that the two should be made to be compared since they are not in the same category. To isolate wing chun's punching and compare it to boxing you take it away from what it is, and you can't really do that or it's not wing chun. So I actually didn't make any such comparison. I only compared the two as wholes.

Actually, i think youll find i was asked how a boxer would respond to a situation and it went on from there

[GlennR]

They're welcome to disagree. As I said it's down to the individual and what they can do with it in a given situation against a given opponent. But RK's "street boxing" employs tactics not allowed in traditional boxing. It's modified. And the competition faced in PKA is hardly less restricted. Pure sport boxing against an unrestricted and well-rounded fighter? I don't know anyone that confident/stupid.

What about pure boxing against pure WC just to stay with the comparison.

Oh, and wasnt it some expert that said of all the styles to face, boxing was the hardest.

What was his name?

Ummmmmmm............. Thats its , some guy called WSL!

[LFJ]

LFJ is wrong in saying that boxing punching is not inherently more flexible than wing chun punching- it obviously is.
Correct.

Bullsh!t. Quote me.


Actually, i think youll find i was asked how a boxer would respond to a situation and it went on from there

And at which point did I compare boxing punching vs wing chun punching?


What about pure boxing against pure WC just to stay with the comparison.

"What about it"? That's what I'd been comparing.