http://www.wingchuntaoist.com/2012/1...t-pak-sau.html
What you think?
Printable View
http://www.wingchuntaoist.com/2012/1...t-pak-sau.html
What you think?
X-ed hand Pak Sau is absolutely Wing Chun. It is a part of chi sau training. What Bruce used was Wing Chun, and not JKD. Watch it carefully in slow motion.
.....til it's done to you. :)
Scene from a movie, JKD not WC, wrong starting position, blah blah blah ...
That movie scene still kicks a$$ (literally).
No sh!t, Sherlock.Quote:
I am sure that they practiced that scene for a while before filming it.
I'm sure your training involves a bit of practice and repetition too.
My response was actually directed towards Jackie.
And why isnt it an example of Wing Chun? I think Bruce Lee did a good job with that one. X pak sau is a great technique. I would love to do that to someone given the opportunity.
Great martial cinema for it's time....
Leaving aside that its a well rehearsed movie clip, I think its pretty poor as an example of a pak sau entry. BL's footwork is awful, he over commits his bodyweight and is only punching with his arm. If you only concentrate on the hand speed it looks good but if you look a bit closer it falls apart.
i rather like the post...I understand what they mean by weight displacement and body structure and footwork...But in the same token its very good way to illustrate that Bruce LEE utilize the ESSENCE of PAK DA in this opening scene.
Although one would argue in actual application you need to apply it different..i think its a good video showing basic pak sau application...Of course you can add any strike you want a sun fist, a hook, a jab, a hammer fist, etc?
Agree!!
I'm still a Bruce Lee fan, and I cannot think of anyone else who did as much for Wing Chun. People like to talk cr@p about him, criticize his techniques, but the truth is - he would have kicked the asses of most of the armchair warriors on this board without breaking a sweat.
My SiFu told me that one of the things Yip Man admired about Bruce was that he had an incredible work ethic in regards to training. If only everyone trained half as hard.
In that crossing hands with Wall in Enter the Dragon-it was a beautiful move.He adapted wing chun for the requirements of the movie- nothing wrong with that.
100% correct. What Joy said also.Quote:
I'm still a Bruce Lee fan, and I cannot think of anyone else who did as much for Wing Chun. People like to talk cr@p about him, criticize his techniques, but the truth is - he would have kicked the asses of most of the armchair warriors on this board without breaking a sweat.
My SiFu told me that one of the things Yip Man admired about Bruce was that he had an incredible work ethic in regards to training. If only everyone trained half as hard.
It just isn't. It was strictly for the movie. JKD is just a modified form of his wing chun, but he was also not that fast. Some scenes were sped up and they used bamboo against ripe watermelons for sound effects. Crossed hands could lead to all sorts of mishaps where you could be jerked and trapped just to get a face full of fist.
Strictly for the movie fight scene. He stood in front of a mirror for hours at a time practicing for that speed, and I am guessing that he would not actually be able to pull that off outside the movie set.
It's just a movie guys. It's scripted and has nothing as far as real combative value. Now cut out the Bruce Lee circle jerk and discuss something worthwhile.
Okay, granted - it was a movie with sound affects, but to say that Bruce Lee was'nt fast would be laughable. Bruce Lee was very fast. Speed was one of Bruce's best attributes on and off the screen.
And to say "I would'nt do this because he can do that, and this can happen, and that could happen." is strictly nonsense. In a real fight ANYTHING can happen, you just have to be the person MAKING it happen.
And the nucleus of JKD is Wing Chun, at least when Bruce was doing it! ;)
It's on the exact same level as discussing the application of things Jet Li does in his movies. It's a film. There's nothing of actual combat in it. If you want to look to things for technique and application look at trained fighters against other trained fighters not some guy who did movies, looked cool, and had no fight record beyond unverifiable stories tossed around.
We are not talking about a Wu Shu champion who made it into movies.
We are talking about a famous martial artist, who studied under a very famous Wing Chun instructor, who taught and created his own art, and inspired millions with his kung fu movies (we have all watched a hundred times) on a Wing Chun forum. I think it's pretty legit conversation.
So what's your fighting record like?
You're talking about an actor who has no legitimate fight record. The two are equivalent.
Martial artists means nothing if you don't fight skilled opponents.
Who cares. That doesn't mean a thing. There are guys who studied from videotapes and went to fight in the UFC with good success while people who trained under very legitimate instructors failed to measure up.
Again who cares. I could create my own art, it doesn't mean a thing.
Just like Sylvester Stallone in Rocky....
I think there's no reason to take his fighting abilities seriously since he never fought anyone worthwhile and because of that there's no reason to look to him for any kind of fighting application when there are plenty of other worthwhile idols who actually fought skilled opponents. I can name tons off the top of my head who were from or before his era. Masahiko Kimura, The Great Gama, Karl Gotch, Muhammed Ali, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston... The list goes on, and those aren't even counting the more modern Vale Tudo matches and MMA. Even the guys who stepped up in the early UFC and got their butts handed to them by Royce Gracie had more balls than Bruce.
Don't try to change to an irrelevant subject. If you want we can discuss that on another thread but it has no relevance to the fact that Bruce Lee has nothing really to do with fighting compared to others who could be used as examples.
"I think there's no reason to take his fighting abilities seriously since he never fought anyone worthwhile"
With this logic, I guess you could say YM,WSL,PB,LT,Emin, William Cheung, and every other Master of ANY MA shouldn't be taken seriously because none of them have "fought anybody worthwhile". Your argument is stupid. Unless you knew BL,or sparred BL, or fought BL, you really don't know. So to argue about something you don't know, is silly and stupid.
Let's put it this way Jake, I'd be far more afraid of Kimura than of Kano and more inclined to listen to anything he had to say because he put his money where his mouth was.
Totally agree with you.
Bacon - no sense in debating this with you. You believe what you believe, and it certainly isn't my job to try and change that. Besides, I really don't care. I don't take anything on this forum too seriously anyway. 90% of it is laughable fantasy. I'm just killing a liitle time cause I'm laid up with the flu. Peace...
I'd say it was a fun movie scene, but has little to do with Wing Chun unless we over simplify Wing Chun and strip it down to the barest of technique level, but that isn't really what Wing Chun is.
Looking at it from principle level, I'd say he was giving up most of the WC concept/principles in preference of speed. Look at his narrow fencing stance at the setup. And then when he 'pak das' he is hopping up out of his root and shifting most all his weight to the front leg, his hands have a long/short problem, does not even address the bridge, etc. This tells me he is ignoring WC self centerline & A-to-B centerline theories, duei ying facing & gate theories, opponent's gravity, etc to execute a 'technique' as fast as possible in a lucky strike manner.
But then really, it IS a movie and it does LOOK cool (whcih is most important in a film), so not really sure why it's being discussed :)
Oh FFS..... its a movie scene!
It may look flash, buts its as relevant to fighting as a good cake recipe.
If you want to see someone that is magic to watch AND can fight.... watch this chap
Bruce wouldnt know last a round.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VLWBVpL23k
JPinAZ - this is off topic. Are you a part of HFY in Arizona? If so, who is your SiFu?
C'mon now. They were great boxers. They weren't martial artists. Are we talking martial arts, boxing, wrestling, brawli or what? Sugar Ray didn't study Wing Chun. Why is he even in this discussion?
If you don't think this thread is worth your time - move on. Go start a best alltime boxerthread. Don't discredit a martial artist without any kind of proof. That's like saying Musashi was a poor swordsman because there was no video capture of him fighting with anyone worthy or that he was more of a writer than a swordsman.
This is where you should be:
www.boxingforums.com
This thread is derailed, DEAD, destroyed and disengrating to nothingness with every new post!!!
wow...At the end of the day...Strickly hand techniques...Bruce Lee borrowed or use alot of WC techinques with HIS own art and also on the screen...You check out the movie rapid fire...The scene where Brandon Lee was doing Lop Sau against the balding chinese guy...you see alot WC techs there...Now of course in actual fighting...When you practice more than ONE art...You may or may not use all the principles and Theories of WC...but just because you omit one or two here and there doesn't mean your not doing WC...At the end of the day its about fighting...NOT what lineage or principles you apply....If you win the Fight...then your WC is good. If you loose the fight then your WC needs work!!!
Winners dictate the name of their ART!
Why werent they martial artists?Quote:
C'mon now. They were great boxers. They weren't martial artists. Are we talking martial arts, boxing, wrestling, brawli or what? Sugar Ray didn't study Wing Chun. Why is he even in this discussion?
Is the guy at the boxing gym training 4 nights a week any different to a WC guy doing the same?
Or is WC more "scientific"??
Or because its of asian origin?
Whats judo then?
I dont think the topic of this thread is really worth anyones time.Quote:
If you don't think this thread is worth your time - move on. Go start a best alltime boxerthread. Don't discredit a martial artist without any kind of proof. That's like saying Musashi was a poor swordsman because there was no video capture of him fighting with anyone worthy or that he was more of a writer than a swordsman.
Its a totally useless drill/technique as portrayed in the scene.
But people gravitate towards it (should i say WC people) because it LOOKS good.
My reason for putting up the Sugar Ray clip was to say "heres someone that looks good AND is effective at the same time", i wasnt comparing styles at all. Id happily put up a WC guy doing the same but i cant find a clip of one.
So question for you, if youre a WC trainer, are you going to point your students towards that clip and say that is good WC and/or fighting technique?
And heres one for you .....Quote:
This is where you should be:
[url]www.boxingforums.com[/url
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/enter_the_dragon/
D@mn, Yoshi's right! This thread is derailed! Thank you for bringing me to my senses. I apologize for contributing to it.
I just erased my entire response to Glenn, because it's just useless banter. Not worth the time debating. Unfortunately for me, this was probably one of the more interesting threads for me on the forum. Lol
Agree to disagree....
Cheers!
Pot meet kettle. This is very similar to the way most of your threads are viewed ;)
Besides, it's a thread about a movie scene that has little to do with WC to begin with - how much on the tracks did you expect it to be?
You couldn't be more wrong. It's a wonder you studied WC for over 15 years and still say this nonsense. WC IS the principles/theories, not a toolbag of techniques. You take away the core concepts or ignore the foundational principles, you are no longer 'doing' WC - all you have is just some moves backed by attributes.
Just for laughs, please share with us what pinciples/theories of WC you feel could be taken out and still be considered doing WC?
This makes no sense. If you ignored the principles of WC, you weren't doing WC PERIOD, regardless if you win or lose (you can do either without WC).
Since you seem to like circle jerks....Quote:
Now cut out the Bruce Lee circle jerk and discuss something worthwhile.
The "I am Bruce Lee" documentary has quite a few MMA fighters and celebrated boxers doing the same thing as those complementing Bruce Lee are here.
LOL at you nobodies putting him down. Pathetic form.
Whats there to apologise about??
The original post was "heres a clip..... what do you think of it?"
Everyone has given their opinion, people have disagreed and debate has ensued.
Personally, i kept my comments to the clip (Not BL) and seems that disagreeing means that the thread has been derailed in the opinion of some.
If you want to repost it as ..... "Heres a clip... only comment if you think it is awesome" then go for your life and i, for one, will keep my opinions to myself
Yes Kimura was great and the original Sugar Ray was probably the best boxer ever...but that has little to do with the question asked at the beginning of the thread-on the scene from Enter the Dragon.
It's a movie scene and the photography and direction had the viewer in mind-it is not meant to be an instructional video.
Pak da, front kick into the groin from the ground and the side kick were good dramatized and suggestive movie representations of wing chun motions by Bruce Lee.
Different contexts and merits involved in the kimura and in boxing Why confuse the contexts.?