Re: Wing Chun and fighting-How to do it?
Quote:
Originally posted by hunt1
At this point I we understand that several members of the forum think that you have to fight to learn how to use wing chun.
Could we take it to the next level please? What has fighting taught you exactly? For example It would be instructive if someone said I was taught to do bong sau this way but I have found when fighting it is better used that way.
This is a wing chun forum after all and once upon a time discussions actually talked about how to use wing chun.
This was the original post on this thread - anybody remember it?
Sounds like Hunter wants to go back to the days wherein we spent some time discussing how to use WC in this or that situation...as opposed to now...wherein it's mainly "either you're a fighter or you're not" that characterizes the main gist of the majority of threads.
It's a bit of a dilemma that I think Jim Roselando may have provided a third way answer to - videos. Definitely gonna make it my business to post some - hopefully in the near future.
But it's a good idea, and would (could) go a long way toward - if not actually resolving - then at the very least bringing some clarity to - what the "two camps" around here are trying to say.
About wing chun and fighting...about how to use your bong sao in ways you may not have been originally taught, by way of one little example. About what kinds of training/conditioning/sparring one needs to really be able to fight well - about why some WC people advocate crosstraining in grappling arts...about a lot of things.
And I have to agree that Terence's point about "not being able to learn anything from videos - just go out and fight"...is puzzling to me - as it is seemingly puzzling to some other people as well.
If we want the "theoreticians" to either shut up or put up...then we "fighters" have to be held to the same standard.
Re: Re: Wing Chun and fighting-How to do it?
Victor wrote:
Sounds like Hunter wants to go back to the days wherein we spent some time discussing how to use WC in this or that situation...as opposed to now...wherein it's mainly "either you're a fighter or you're not" that characterizes the main gist of the majority of threads.
---Only the threads that Terence feels the need to participate in. He is the one that has "drawn the line in the sand" and likes to label people. I keep asking him "where's the balance", but he keeps ignoring that question. You and I know that nothing is ever so black and white. A big part of the problem is that Terence has chosen to define "fighting" the way most would define "sparring", and many don't realize that. There are many gradations and intensity levels in progressive sparring situations. He has created this dichotomy where none really exists and then keeps hammering it in. The truth is that many if not most of us here do more than just forms and chi sau. We try to "functionalize" our training with progressive sparring drills that become as realistic as feasible. But we still value a "traditional" approach to training and learning and are willing to question our ability and experience rather than the traditional teaching itself if something doesn't work for us right off the bat in a sparring situation. We also value discussions about "why" WCK works (theory), and how other lineages teach or practice certain things. With his extremist stance, Terence seems to deny all of that. He comes across as someone that endorses training at full tilt trying to hurt his partner (opponent?) during every training session. He sounds like someone who would endorse going out on Saturday night and looking for the opportunity to test his skills in the parking lot of the local nightclub. I don't really believe all that of him, but that is certainly the impression he leaves on this forum. KPM
It's a bit of a dilemma that I think Jim Roselando may have provided a third way answer to - videos. Definitely gonna make it my business to post some - hopefully in the near future.
---I think it is an excellent idea as well. I also think Hunt's original purpose for this thread was a good one. Why haven't more of the "fighters" posted with things that they have learned or things they have changed about their WCK based on their fighting experience? And I don't buy the line "I don't think in terms of technique anymore." That's total ...B....S.... Terence says that fighting experience should be the guide to what your WCK consists of, and not traditional teaching. So.....has Terence stopped practicing the Chum Kiu form because Chor Ma Double Lan technique is not useful in fighting? Has he learned to fold his Bong Sau over in application because it smothers the other guys technique better in a fighting situation? Has he learned to hold his Mon Sau guard position higher because most people nowadays are "head-hunters"? What's so hard about actually contributing to the conversation rather than always coming back with "fight!fight!fight! or your wing chun is worthless!"? KPM
And I have to agree that Terence's point about "not being able to learn anything from videos - just go out and fight"...is puzzling to me - as it is seemingly puzzling to some other people as well.
---Like I said above, I think it is just rationalization for not being willing to send in clips of himself. KPM
If we want the "theoreticians" to either shut up or put up...then we "fighters" have to be held to the same standard.
---Exactly. After all, this is just a discussion forum. Everything we say here is purely theoretical, because we can't see what the other person is doing or is capable of. So even Terence's extremist position is purely theoretical when he talks about it in a discussion forum unless there is evidence that he backs it up. KPM
Keith