My work is done here. You are what you are and everybody knows it.
Back to IGNORE.
Printable View
My work is done here. You are what you are and everybody knows it.
Back to IGNORE.
You wrote: "Funny, you never mentioned if you fought even once, just that the guys you 'train with' fight as part of their training.. There was no 'we' in that statement. So, unless you're speaking from your experience as a fighter."
And this shows that you don't appreciate that sparring is -- or at least should be -- fighting. What you do when you spar is practice fighting. It is just like when you swim, you practice swimming. When you run, you practice running. When you ride a bike, you practice riding a bike. When you surf, you practice surfing. Do you get the idea yet? This is why swimmers, runners, bicyclists, surfers, etc. develop skill. Because they are doing the activity itself as their training. They do X to get better at X. And that is why sport fighters develop so much better skill than TMAists -- they are practicing fighting as the core of their training (doing X to get better at X). They are not LARPING, they are fighting. The people who are LARPing are the TMAists who do forms, unrealistic drills, "tests of skill", etc.
You've obviously never trained at a BJJ or MT or MMA class.Quote:
Showing up to class, putting in your mouthguard and saying 'coach I'm here' and then sitting on the sidelines isn't fighting, that's 'going to class'. Just like going to a workshop and sitting in a corner ;)
And, btw, you seem to keep referencing the Ohio Frinedship seminar (sitting on the sidelines). You are misinformed (as usual). I didn't sit on the sidelines. I left. When Benny taught his chi sao seminar, I left (I didn't sit and watch).
And where are your clips, your sifu's clips, Garrett's clips? Are they all chicken sh1t too? Or is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black?Quote:
I give credit to Phil and his guys showing clips of themselves 'fighting' - at whatever level they are at - and posting it up on youtube. Something you are too chicken sh!t to do.
You would have seen for yourself that me and my whole group fight/spar if you had shown up to kick my ass as you said you were. ;) LOL!Quote:
Not really the posting up the vids part (which you are that too), but more just proving you've fought one day in your life. Again, 'going to class' isn't fighting. That doesn't even imply you train. Maybe the other guys you give nut-underdogs too fight at those same 'classes', but obviously you don't.
So you think it commendable that people put up videos of themselves to promote themselves, which show them sparring but unable to do any of what they train to do? I see. Brilliant. Really brilliant. I expect nothing less from you.Quote:
Again, stop being an idiot for 10 seconds (if that's possible) and stop putting words into my mouth. What matters is that you aren't afraid to step up and test your skills. What I find commendable is that they (Phil and his guys) aren't afraid to put it out there and show where they are at - and not giving a sh!t what scared little trolling key-board LARPers that 'go to class' and call it fighting when the play fighting say about them.
Sure it does since you call people who won't do that chicken sh1t.Quote:
FWIW, whether or not I or who I train with put up clips has nothing to do with this.
I'm not saying "everyone here sucks". But if someone puts up a video where the are sparring and can't make what they train to do work, what would you call that? If they post videos showing "how to deal with punches" but then when you see them spar you don't see any of that, what would you call it?Quote:
I'm not the one coming on here, saying everyone here sucks,
Again, that's not what I am saying. I am saying that if you want to learn how to train properly, then go train with sport fighters --with proven, good fighters -- they know how to best train. Nor am I saying that only I have the "real WCK". There is no such thing. There is only WCK. There is a core curriculum that MANY people have, and many other are missing elements of. Do you think this is untrue?Quote:
only I have the 'real WC', only I know how to train correctly, etc as you do.
I'm not saying everyone's videos suck. I've pointed out videos that don't.Quote:
Nor am I ro anyone I train with coming here saying everyone's videos suck.
You seem to be the hateful one. I have said before, that I like most other people in WCK, didn't see the limitations in both my training and in the curriculum I had learned, and that I was thankful to the WCML and Robert (and Rene, Hendrik, etc.) for helping me see that. BFD. Many of you still don't seem to recognize it. It's not that you're stupid, it's that you won't give yourself the right kind of experience.Quote:
That's what LARPer wannabe, no-skill jealous trolls like you do because you're a hateful little man who's still bitter at the world because he was too stupid to realize he wasted nearly 20 years on crap WC and still had not one ounce of fighting skill.
Terence has spoken so it has to be so er or is it ?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 714
Disclaimer: this is not a reply directed toward T, so he doesn't need to apply.
Last post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.
Previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.
Another previous one:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.
Again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
Sounds like fighting to me...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
But then:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.
But wait, that's not right either:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Grappling is being in contact and trying to physically manipulate your opponent to reach your objective. That's what wrestlers do, that's what judoka do, that's what sumo wrestlers do,and that's what we do in WCK -- except we add strikesto the mix. Chi sao is similar to a wreslter's handfighting.
and lastly again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling."
Which is it, is it grappling and striking (fighting), or is it an excersize? Is it wrestler's handfighting or is it a useless unrealistic excersize?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
oh wait, one more time:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.
and
Previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.
Or, was it
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
...it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.
Is it an excersize that teaches useful fighting skills or unrealistic excersize?
Is it grappling or isn't it?
Is it for fighting or isn't it?
No wonder there's confusion...
Reply With Quote
:D
terences understanding of Lop sao .....not :D for him to say lopsao is 'grappling' lmaorotf:D:D:D:D:D
pssst lop sao is to help 'turn' an opponent on their axis. A tactical idea terence .....
would be required to read your last post, k gledhill (Kevin).
The total contradictions and 180 degree reversals in the middle of the field by Niehoff are just friggin' amazing.
The guy is a joke.
It appears you aren't very bright either (like Jonathan). It's not difficult to understand.
Chi sao is an unrealistic exercise/drill that is a learning platform (to learn the contact tools of WCK). But it doesn't develop fighting skill (the ability to use those tools in fighting). That only comes from fighting.
Chi sao is a contact/attached exercise. Since it is attached, where we maintain sustained contact, it is grappling. Not a form of grappling, not a style of grappling, but grappling -- that also involves striking. And since WCK's method is to control while striking, it makes sense that you'd have a teaching platform to learn controlling while striking.
And chi sao, like all grappling, is primarily concerned with controlling the opponent.
Lop sao is likewise a grappling move (you grab and pull) where you control the opponent to set up your striking. Gosh, what a surprise!
PS - how else can you learn contact/attached fighting skills but in a contact/attached mode or platform?
T,
If Chi Sau is an unrelalistic exercise then why even include it in the system??? an your ideas are getting worse the more I read . I dont think you are brainless FWIW but your idea of VT absolutely sucks!!!!
How can you say Chi Sau doesn't develop fighting skill. Of course it f***king does!!!! Thats what it is for!!! I can see why your Chi Sau doesn't develop fighting skills......its because you are doing it wrong mate!!!
Your "theoretical non fighters" idea is nonsense but yet you keep throwing it at everybody on here. Why???? What have YOU done??? Where is the footage of YOU with your WCK MMA BS??? I reckon you should put up or shut up. PLEASE!!!!
Chi Sau is NOT totally an attached exercise!!!!! The attached part is there for a specific purpose but the idea is how we can learn to break free from contact and obstruction should our punches encounter it in a fight. YOUR way will only work WCK vs WCK whereas my idea is how we can fight against anybody. This is why you guys have to cross train and add other things into the system.....because your WCK is flawed.
All I see when I watch the videos you put up is two people doing what we can do already. We can already fight that way without MA's. In my lineage we train to correct those errors and by gradually increasing the intensity we learn to fight using Ving Tsun in the mess that is fighting.
What I would suggest to you is Terence that you QUIT Wing Chun and concentrate on MMA. Can you make that your Christmas present to me???
Chi Sau and Lap Sau are NOT grappling exercises. YOU and your peers have turned it into grappling exercises but that is not correct IMO.. I would sooner practice origami than practice your system of WCK!!!!
Lots of love and kisses
"Unattached Graham H":p
GH
Forms are unrealistic, san sao is unrealsitic, the dummy is unrealistic -- everything in the curriculum is unrealistc. And that is the TMA way of teaching, to teach things in via unrealistic exercises.
No, it doesn't because your opponent is not really fighting you -- he is playing chi sao with you. If you don't know the difference, get a nonWCK person, start in contact and then fight. You will see that it doesn't "look" like chi sao but more like this:Quote:
How can you say Chi Sau doesn't develop fighting skill. Of course it f***king does!!!! Thats what it is for!!! I can see why your Chi Sau doesn't develop fighting skills......its because you are doing it wrong mate!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f97513HQoEk
If you think chi sao develops fighting skill, then do THAT and see how well you can use what you practice in chi sao.
And, believing chi sao develops fighting skills proves you are a fantasy fu guy.
People who make sparring the core of their training are fighters. People who do everything but spar -- like people who believe chi sao develops fighting skill -- are theoretical nonfighters. They believe that they know what works in fighting by not fighting, that they get better at fighting by not fighting, etc.Quote:
Your "theoretical non fighters" idea is nonsense but yet you keep throwing it at everybody on here. Why???? What have YOU done??? Where is the footage of YOU with your WCK MMA BS??? I reckon you should put up or shut up. PLEASE!!!!
You have it backwards. That is what comes from being a theoretical nonfighter. And from not knowing much about WCK. The method of WCK comes from our ancestors, not from Bayer or even WSL. The kuit tells us if there is no bridge, create one. Why? To break free? LOL! You think that our signature exercise, what WCK is known for, chi sao, is really just to teach you how to clear an obstruction? You really need to get out and learn WCK.Quote:
Chi Sau is NOT totally an attached exercise!!!!! The attached part is there for a specific purpose but the idea is how we can learn to break free from contact and obstruction should our punches encounter it in a fight. YOUR way will only work WCK vs WCK whereas my idea is how we can fight against anybody. This is why you guys have to cross train and add other things into the system.....because your WCK is flawed.
But you don't do that -- it is a theory. You have someone who can't doing it "correcting" what he believes are errors, but he is only teaching you how to fail. If he can't do it, how can he teach you to do it?Quote:
All I see when I watch the videos you put up is two people doing what we can do already. We can already fight that way without MA's. In my lineage we train to correct those errors and by gradually increasing the intensity we learn to fight using Ving Tsun in the mess that is fighting.
The point of that video is to show you what it will be like, and simply throwing WCK punches won;t get you far in dealing with that. You are not going to be facing someone throwing WCK straight, elbow down punches.
You don't get it, I do MMA to make my WCK better. We are only as good as our sparring/training partners.Quote:
What I would suggest to you is Terence that you QUIT Wing Chun and concentrate on MMA.
Chi sao/lop sao both are exercises where you maintain sustained contact. Sustained contact is grappling. In chi sao you push, pull, wedge, lift, press, twist, jerk, etc. your opponent to break his structure so as to be able to control him. All of that is grappling.Quote:
Chi Sau and Lap Sau are NOT grappling exercises. YOU and your peers have turned it into grappling exercises but that is not correct IMO.. I would sooner practice origami than practice your system of WCK!!!!
In fact, let's look at what one of WSL's preeminent students, Gary Lam, says about chi sao
http://www.garylamwingchun.com/index...ent&Itemid=113
and
http://www.garylamwingchun.com/index...ent&Itemid=113
So in other words youre just a practice fighter or a simulation fighter? riiiight
no the reason why sport figthers develop so much skill is because is they actuallty get into competions where they take away the familarity of the gym partners. most of the protective gear and they test themselves in an environment where your opponent is attacking you full out.
Ater they competition they can acknowledge whether or not what they are working on truly works or not and they can go back to the drawing board and tweak their game.
since sparring isnt a complete pressure test you only have one slice of the metaphorical pie and your abilties as far as actual figthing goes remain theoretical until you actually get into a real full out fight.
Serously T? This clip again to show us what Chisau IS? Y'know it's actually quite funny that you think what is seen here is fighting "skill". Its like some comedy routine for brawlers that I remember as "windmill in!" NOT the best example of controlled Wing Chun sparring I've seen.
And you need to learn when and where the kiut 'fits' T. This line is designed for Chisau, not Gorsau or Sansau. I believe you must know the difference, because that would be the whole basis for your attached/unattached argument imho.
If I'm fighting you, why would I want you to feel my bridge?
I'm not so sure about this 'grappling' tag you seem to have put to these exercises either. Lapsau CAN be grappling, or what I call 'cum la' (chin na), IF it is used at the right time and progresses further than a 'trapping' hand, which is how it is mainly taught imho. Lapsau doesn't use the thumb as a grab does, as it's not intended like that T, but of course you know better than everyone here?
Seriously, can't you F#CKING read? I didn't say that clip was showing chi sao, I said "If you think chi sao develops fighting skill, then do THAT and see how well you can use what you practice in chi sao." You quoted it, for Christ's sake! That is fighting, not chi sao. That's what fighting will be like at that range.
Stop and THINK. We don't need to "create a bridge" when we do chi sao or gor sao as we START those exercises FROM A BRIDGE.Quote:
And you need to learn when and where the kiut 'fits' T. This line is designed for Chisau, not Gorsau or Sansau. I believe you must know the difference, because that would be the whole basis for your attached/unattached argument imho.
WCK's method is to control while striking the opponent. OK? To do that, we need to have a bridge because we can't control our opponent without one. So, if we don't have contact with an opponent but want to control while striking, then we first need to create a bridge (if one doesn't exist).
WTF are you talking about? "Feel my bridge"? What?Quote:
If I'm fighting you, why would I want you to feel my bridge?
WCK's method is to control while striking. My connection to you is the bridge. This is what I use to control you. I could care less whether you feel it or not.
Look, chin na (Mandarin) or kum na (Cantonese) translates into "seizing and holding". What do you think seizing and holding is if not grappling?Quote:
I'm not so sure about this 'grappling' tag you seem to have put to these exercises either. Lapsau CAN be grappling, or what I call 'cum la' (chin na),
Are you an idiot? It doesn't matter whether you use your thumb to grab or not, it is still grappling (in BJJ they teach to do your kimura with a thumbless grab too, so I guess that isn't grappling by your definition!). Trapping is grappling. Lop sao is a "pulling hand", and pulling is grappling.Quote:
IF it is used at the right time and progresses further than a 'trapping' hand, which is how it is mainly taught imho. Lapsau doesn't use the thumb as a grab does, as it's not intended like that T, but of course you know better than everyone here?
Ah I give up posting against your posts T!!!!!!
You are just a useless fukk1ng idiot!!!! Keep on plugging away douche bag!!!
Regards
Fantasy Fu theoretical non fighter.
Welcome to the club, Graham H. ;)
Terence your confused.....not surprising with all the confusing hand drills and sticking. You just need a little clarification and examples 1st hand. Your relying on grappling hands because like Graham mentions you haven't been shown how to clear the way to strike with techniques but rather make it easier for the oponent to feel YOU.