WT Fight Club

[Merryprankster]

ZL,

I'm not sure you're comparing an MT push kick to your WC front kick. It sounds like you were comparing an MT round kick to a WC front kick.

A Muay Thai push kick, standard, basic version, is thrown with your body square to the opponent. There is no hip rotation. It looks exactly like the kick you described. One also need not move forward, nor do they need to thrust their hips forward, although some do. So, no, I can't agree they are that different at this point. In fact, the reason I brought this up is that I was working with an MT instructor a couple of weeks ago and what he did is exactly what you described, visually.

Now, clearly, an MT round kick is different from a WC front kick, and makes use of a hip rotation for power.

That said, as fa_jing pointed out, the teep, as many call it, can be used to knock out people, and has done so on many occasions. It can also be used as a hip check, a knee check or a shin check and is done so to stop kicks as or before they start while allowing you to create a window for attack. That, incidentally, is by the by, as I was really more interested in the similar mechanics.

Secondly, I don't have a problem with yours or yuanfen's idea that difference does not equal superiority. While I disagree on the DEGREE of that difference, my beef is directed at neither of you. Yuan and I have a long standing disagreement about the degrees of similarity but he is quite articulate about what he believes and why, and I've no problem with that. Nor do I have a problem with what you are writing. I have a problem with crimsonking's not so subtle insinuations that WC is somehow above all other arts--not for a specfic person, but absolutely. That, is elitist crap.

Old Jong--Sarcastic, yes--from both sides, I'm sure My point was to demonstrate that what you said is applicable to any art. It's one of those little pet peeves of mine. The truth is that ANY art takes a great deal of time to master and learn its ins and outs. If this were not true of, say, wrestling, then it would be our young buck college guys that win the olympics, based on their speed, strength, and stamina--after all, they would have learned all they really need to learn, right?

But, that's not the case. Olympic winners are usually 30+ and have been doing it longer than 20 years.

The same has held true in the throwing events.

In any endeavor where excellent skill is paramount, patience and time-in are key. The more you learn it seems the ****her you've got to go, LOL!

[apoweyn]

yuanfen,

Sharing of ideas? Not enough of real ideas...Often its same same old shibboleths

So am I boring you? This answer seems needlessly dismissive.

Not quite- logical analysis of principles of an art are also inportant. Provides a standard for understanding what the doer is doing and if he is doing what he thinks he is

Right. And is that aided or hindered by actually seeing it in action? Seems to me it would be the former. I'm not advocating video over discussion. And I believe you're smart enough to know that. So I'm unclear on your point here.

Not all martial artists care to be on display when important things are not involved

And that's fine. If that's the reasoning, I'm in no position to talk them out of that. Just as long as they don't expect me to believe everything they say at face value. If they don't care what I believe, then we can both be on our merry ways, I suppose.

Not everyone aims to please

Clearly. But this isn't really a point.

3. a modification of one. Knowing for yourself whether and when things work- doesnt have to be observable to others except yourself.

Curious how often people feel justified in telling others how a style should be done but are suddenly content to keep their own counsel when evidence is requested.

Nah--- the net has brought out a common phenomenon- debate for the sake of "hearing" oneself talk

Granted. But I was giving my conversation with you the benefit of the doubt.

Some folks will take part in a test for sufficient money, sufficient principle or for experience- contexts and people vary

I'm talking about testing for experience. Does that clear up the context?

Voyeurs too. Bad drivers show up at accident scenes too- and go out of the same door through which they entered.

Voyeurs might be analogous to spectators at a fight. Not really to other martial artists who want to observe a fight (sparring session, etc.) to learn something more about theory and practice. So I'm again unclear on the point of this analogy.

BTW- I have zero desire to recruit people to my art, or to convince them that it is the "best"... bit on the net anyway-- am interested in sharing analysis of wing chun and just get a passing sense of what is going on elsewhere. Most top flight martaial artists that I know 1.are not the net 2. dont care what goes on on the net..so the net gives a skewed sense of the martial arts world

I'm not talking about being recruited. Nor am I talking about seeing the 'top flight martial artists.' I'm simply asking for visual support to people's descriptions of how the style works. If they're willing to provide text-based information (and have the technological resources), I don't see what the problem is with providing visual backup. It would be extremely helpful for those of us who haven't seen it. That's all.


Stuart B.

[rubthebuddha]

merry -- the mt push kick and the wc front kick are very similar, but there are some striking (pun intended, i guess) differences, both in structure and application. i won't even bother with the internal stuff for now. also note -- nothing in this is meant as a claim of superiority, just a statement of similarities and differences.

1. both kicks keep the hips square to the opponent. turning the hips on such a movement uses different muscles
2. both kicks are typically low, but a wc front kick will also be used to attack the legs as well
3. the push kick uses the ball of the foot as the striking surface, the wc front kick uses the heel. the reason wc uses the heel is that it's more robust than the ball of the foot, and it's right in line with the shinbone up to the knee. however, a push kick with the ball of the foot can employ calf muscles for more oomph.
4. the push kick is mainly that -- a push with the front of the foot. the wc kick is a stomp. not a push, not a flick, not a snap, but a stomp.
5. the push kick keeps the knee of the kicking leg in front of the body, while the wc kick rotates the kicking hip so the knee is pointed somewhat out (right knee pointed somewhat to the right). a couple reasons for this: (a) strength - like being able to squat more with the toes turned out slightly, having the knee pointed out allows a stronger movement, (b) jamming - if your leg is directly in front of you and it gets jammed while someone is closing, as the knee bends, the hamstring and the calf will eventually meet. when this happens, the knee can collapse no more, is pushed back against the torso and the body begins to be pushed back. this also means that your leg can be pushed up to the area in which your hands typically operate. having the knee bend outward means jamming is less of an issue, and the leg won't be in the way of your hands as much.

these are some of the major similarities and differences. i hope others can add to this list.

btw -- sparring tonight, and my hamstrings are hating me. life is good.

[Zhuge Liang]

Hi Merry,

I wasn't talking about a round kick. Mine was from the perspective of a Hapkido and TKD front thrust kick, where you do use your hip to help drive the kick through. I've seen Muay Thai stylists do the same, so I assumed that was the kick you meant. Obviously, you were talking about a different kick.

So let me ask you this, what is the source of power of a Muay Thai push kick? Perhaps you can describe it in more detail?

Despite our apparent agreement of what the form looks like, at least in writing, I have a feeling we have different images of the of the respective kicks in our heads. Our front kick does not depend on hip rotation or on the transferrence of body momentum. Ideally, whether we kick an opponent, a wooden post, or thin air, our bodies (spine and head) are entirely straight and vertical, and there almost no perceptible movement in any other part of the body besides the kicking leg. If we have this on film, and we we digitally removed the kicking leg, there would be little to no indication that anything was happening. You'd see a guy standing on one leg almost motionless.

If Muay Thai has this, I'd be very interested in seeing this, because I have not seen it anywhere else. I have not seen any Thai boxing matches where people kick like this. So if you don't mind, can you elaborate on the mechanics of the push kick and the source of power? I'm very curious about this.

Thanks,
Zhuge Liang

[Edmund]

Hi fellas,

I'm nothing special but I have also done Muay Thai for about a year and I still do some. Last year I did a few days training with
Yuttana Wongbandue, a coach from Bangkok.

He pretty did front kicks the same way as WC I reckon so I agree with Merryprankster. Other WCers will disagree based on their perspectives.

The problem with WC people is that they often do not play well with others. Or even each other sometimes. That is WC's weakness. Hence you get WC sparring that no one likes. And even some discussions that no one likes.

WC's popularity means that not everyone is going to be particularly good. It would take a very skilled WCer to be able to satisfy every other WCer's expectations of what good WC fighting should look like. In the end, people just settle for trying to satisfy their own expectations rather than the world's. A reasonable goal.

Less skilled can still chain punch and front kick .

Originally posted by Merryprankster
A Muay Thai push kick, standard, basic version, is thrown with your body square to the opponent. There is no hip rotation. It looks exactly like the kick you described. One also need not move forward, nor do they need to thrust their hips forward, although some do. So, no, I can't agree they are that different at this point. In fact, the reason I brought this up is that I was working with an MT instructor a couple of weeks ago and what he did is exactly what you described, visually.

[yuanfen]

Apoweyn- I am not being obtuse---we dont do videos of training sessions. Myself- I bought a camcorder to take pictures of my dog for an out of state vet's research project on heat tolerance- the camcorder has been sitting there unused for two years.
No- you are not boring me.

If you are around Phoenix sometimes- a very civil and open comment- let me know- I can show you and explain some things about wing chun directly if you are interested.. I dont give out general invitations.
Or poor second choice- let me know where you are and if I make it that way- we can see about sharing. I do travel from time to time- but it is wing chun related. My home obligations places some limits. BTW- good wing chun involves micromotions that do NOT show up well on videos unless you already know a lot of wing chun. Lots of folks make wrong inferences from videos.

BTW--perhaps not so obvious---my intention is to share and converse when there is an interesting topic- I am not out to lecture people who choose to go a different way in wing chun or MA. On the net all kinds of inferences- often wrong- on tone, nuances and motivations abound. What is boring-- is the repeated unanalytical knee jerk cries..."spar", "go to the ground",
etc....

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by yuanfen
BTW--perhaps not so obvious---my intention is to share and converse when there is an interesting topic-

Sounds good... can you explain how you do your particular form of chi sao that makes it transferable to real-world fighting?

[yuanfen]

Knifefighter-sez
Sounds good... can you explain how you do your particular form of chi sao that makes it transferable to real-world fighting?
---------------------------------------------
Do you really mean real world fighting? Or simulation of fighting- sparring.? The former includes the real possibility of death. The latter- submission, knockout, crying uncle, maybe a broken nose,
a cut or concussion.

Again - repeating myself--- chi sao is NOT a drill- though what you have seen maybe. It is a laboratory of timing dvelopment and what to do in seeking, breaking, retaining, closing and manipulating contact in many kinds of motion and movement- sitting, standing, walking, moving, turning, under varying levels of pressure with indivisuals- with more than one individual.

BTW- given your screen name-the best knife fighters I have known are from the northern part of my home state and beyond- the Gurkhas-they are for real-- though they dont do videos for KFO or skeptics!!

[EnterTheWhip]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Seems to depend on how you define it here. Why don't you tell me your definition?

Your definition of fighting fits the bill. So the question that remains is: based on your definition of what "fighting" is, what is the different between fighting and chi sau?

[Merryprankster]

the best knife fighters I have known are from the northern part of my home state and beyond- the Gurkhas-they are for real-- though they dont do videos for KFO or skeptics!!

True, but we have some real history, not histrionics, that lets us know just how feared they really were/are!

rubthebuddha, w/regards to your 4 and 5, which were differences between the MT push kick and the WC front kick, that really depends on who is throwing it and how it is being used. I have seen a push kick thrown with the heel as well as with the knee turned out. Especially if used as a hip, knee or shin check. It really just depends.

I do acknowledge, however, that the standard push kick is thrown with the ball of the foot, not the heel. However, I would not personally classify this as a major difference.

ZL, I have seen both the push kicks you describe, the one where the MT stylist leans well back and pushes their hip forward, and also where they just pick their leg up, and there is almost no movement in the rest of their body. While the first is longer range, and many have experienced success with it, I find it awkward (proof that WC is superior? LOL ). I prefer the second.

I was doing some light sparring with an MT instructor I know and he does the second one, the one similar to your WC front kick, almost exclusively. He's there in stance, then, all of a sudden, you have a foot in your gut/chest/hip, wherever, and you're moving backwards/writhing in pain . It took me a couple of shots to figure out exactly what he was doing, but it reminded me very much of the videos I've seen here, Emin Boztepe and others, using that kick.

As far as power source, I can't be 100% certain--kicking isn't my forte. I need to play around with it more. As far as I can tell right now though, based on my limited use in drills and being on the receiving end of it, the majority of the power seems to come from nothing more than proper structure and angling. This makes it difficult to use a common counter--sweeping the leg to the side/kickcatch and tripping or punching, which I can do with some regularity with the other version. The recovery is remarkably fast because you are never extending/overextending body parts, so mobility isn't impaired on landing.

EnterTheWhip; the difference between fighting and chi sao (or sparring) is the difference between manslaughter and homicide--intent. The other guy in a fight probably wants to hurt you, without regard for your safety or improving your skills or grabbing a pint later. I'm assuming your chi sao (or sparring) partner isn't an immature hothead and conducts himself/herself in a manner consistent with safety and skill improvement while still doing his/her utmost to beat your ass senseless. :P

If you start your Chi Sao well apart, without contact, and both parties are now attempting to "do their thing," then I would say you are sparring, by my definition. If you are starting from a position that presumes entry has already occurred and contact has begun, then I would argue you are drilling, by my definition.

This *may* be an issue of terminology and semantics, vice horrible disagreement.

[yuanfen]

Quick responses in brackets to MP before doing the am dog exercise thing:

If you start your Chi Sao well apart, without contact, and both parties are now attempting to "do their thing," then I would say you are sparring, by my definition.

((The chi sao I do is a continuum- includes randomly changing from
poon sao (Rolling contact) to breaking off, turning, stepping, standing, moving away, closing the gap, lop sao(quasi grabbing),
leg work, attacking and above all controlling. Your definition chi sao possibly- but sparring means other things to some. Beginners and many wcers dont go through what I describe-
wing chun world is a very uneven one. One has to stay the course with good instruction rather than just picking up pointers.))))

EnterTheWhip; the difference between fighting and chi sao (or sparring) is the difference between manslaughter and homicide--intent.

((Enough wing chun and you can use whatever intentional gear you wish or is required)))

ZL, I have seen both the push kicks you describe, the one where the MT stylist leans well back and pushes their hip forward, and also where they just pick their leg up, and there is almost no movement in the rest of their body

((A true wing chun kick disguises movement))

True, but we have some real history, not histrionics, that lets us know just how feared they really were/are!

((Regarding the Gurkhas... only with the induction by the Brits
was so called any history on the Gurkhas written. But without written history knowledgeable folks just knew- the Gurkhas saw action against various invaders long before the Brits. History -has many meanings and faces- to some chronology, others oral passing of tradition, some pictographs, others spaced knots ona thread,
some songs, some a dance drama))

((PS. MT became a national sport in old Siam. BJJ spread in Brazil.WC was and is not a national sport. The real core of WC was fairly small. CMA was richly varied---family arts, temple arts,rebel arts, guerrilla arts, village arts, brigands art etc.
Hence samples of top flight wing chun is more rare than top flight
MT and BJJ. Gotta go- my four legged highness calls))

[kj]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
EnterTheWhip; the difference between fighting and chi sao (or sparring) is the difference between manslaughter and homicide--intent. The other guy in a fight probably wants to hurt you, without regard for your safety or improving your skills or grabbing a pint later.

I can agree with that.

I'm assuming your chi sao (or sparring) partner isn't an immature hothead and conducts himself/herself in a manner consistent with safety and skill improvement while still doing his/her utmost to beat your ass senseless. :P

The way many people on this forum write and admonish others, it appears that they do indeed believe everyone who doesn't practice this way is remiss or foolish. That is where I beg to differ.

To set aside concern for one's safety and well-being in any scenario is foolishness, IMHO. Still, I respect people's right to be as foolhardy as they wish to be.

There are apparently some amongst us who do not commensurately respect the right and responsibility I and others hold to manage our own safety and well-being as we see fit.

If you start your Chi Sao well apart, without contact, and both parties are now attempting to "do their thing," then I would say you are sparring, by my definition. If you are starting from a position that presumes entry has already occurred and contact has begun, then I would argue you are drilling, by my definition.

We do indeed have "lat sau" (not specifically the WT variety) and "gor sau." So I guess by this definition, more of us "spar" more often than we think we do.

This *may* be an issue of terminology and semantics, vice horrible disagreement.

As I and some others have said many times. Until there can be whole, finite, and universal agreement on the nuances and distinctions between chi sau, sparring, fighting, self-defense and the like, there will always be this.

Very reasonable post, Merry, and apologies for stepping in where someone else was being addressed.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[EnterTheWhip]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
The other guy in a fight probably wants to hurt you, without regard for your safety or improving your skills or grabbing a pint later.

What about the safety of your opponent?

By the way, MP, I forgot that you don't do Wing Chun, and discussing this with you is pointless. This is more for everyone else - people who do Wing Chun, and perhaps some of which, actually understand it.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by yuanfen
Apoweyn- I am not being obtuse---we dont do videos of training sessions. Myself- I bought a camcorder to take pictures of my dog for an out of state vet's research project on heat tolerance- the camcorder has been sitting there unused for two years.
No- you are not boring me.

If you are around Phoenix sometimes- a very civil and open comment- let me know- I can show you and explain some things about wing chun directly if you are interested.. I dont give out general invitations.
Or poor second choice- let me know where you are and if I make it that way- we can see about sharing. I do travel from time to time- but it is wing chun related. My home obligations places some limits. BTW- good wing chun involves micromotions that do NOT show up well on videos unless you already know a lot of wing chun. Lots of folks make wrong inferences from videos.

BTW--perhaps not so obvious---my intention is to share and converse when there is an interesting topic- I am not out to lecture people who choose to go a different way in wing chun or MA. On the net all kinds of inferences- often wrong- on tone, nuances and motivations abound. What is boring-- is the repeated unanalytical knee jerk cries..."spar", "go to the ground",
etc....

Yuanfen,

Okay, so you don't video training sessions. And that's fine. What I'm objecting to is the inference that the only reason to do so is showing off on the internet. It's a tool that helps us get on the same page in these discussions. That's all. You don't do it, and that's fine. If I'm ever out in Phoenix, I'll let you know. I'm in the DC metro area myself.

I agree that kneejerk cries of "spar" and "go to the ground" are dull. Assuming they don't lead anywhere. But there are a lot of well spoken people here for whom "spar" is where the discussion starts. And that is not dull. It can get confrontational. But not dull.

You're certainly right about inferences on the internet. But then, that's another reason why I find video helpful. Granted, some movements are going to be small enough that video won't do them justice. But without even that much, even a statement like "the blah blah round kick is really fast" is completely meaningless. There's no concrete definition of "really fast." Or "economical" or "effective" or anything else we bandy around as descriptors here.

Anyway, I understand that you don't video things. I'm not going to badger you about it further.


Stuart B.

[yuanfen]

Stuart B- in one of the threads I gave a list of possible sources
for seeing chi sao demos.

As for "the blah blah round kick is really fast"-thats not my style of communication.

In any case- with good wishes, Joy