Brief clip of Alan Jensen

[AndrewS]

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkUSCVZXGg4&mode=related&search=>

A brief instructional clip of one of the senior Alliance guys, and head of the Danish WT organization. Interesting motion.

Andrew

[Knifefighter]

OK, since I'm getting grief about my "anti-WC" sentiments, how about we start a rational discussion using the various WC clips shown on that page?

What does everyone think are the negatives and positives in each of the clips on that page in terms of applications to real fighting?

[Matrix]

Hi Dale,

I don't know about "rational discussion" , and I'm not sure if we all see the same clips on the side when we open the original video.

Quite frankly I'm not overly impressed by a lot of the demo clips. In a "real fight", I think the opponent might actually fight back - call me crazy. We often see a single attack, then the counter, as the opponent freezes or drops their hands while the defender goes nuts. They are supposed to be doing a demo and if the attacker actually fought back, it would be a fight, not a demo. I still think the attacker could be a lot less passive. So, to answer your question, there's not a lot of real word application being shown.

It's easy to be critical. In the clip that started this thread, we are looking at instruction where the sifu is breaking things down and explaining some of the details of WC theory. So it's not subject to the same comments as some of the "demo" clips.

[Edmund]

Yeah. He seemed to be just teaching the basic techniques to students in a seminar rather than trying to demonstrate how to beat up someone. It's fairly standard applications like tan and punch, lop and punch etc.

[AmanuJRY]

Why are we constantly looking for proof of ability demonstrated in video.

Why not reality?

Frankly, I'm tired of internet WC videos.

[Matrix]

Why not reality?

Justin,

The question posted by Dale was whether these demo videos reflect some people's view of reality. I think it's a valid question.

If you're tired of the videos, that's cool. I think they offer some insight of how others interpret Wing Chun theory and principles.

[AmanuJRY]

Justin,

The question posted by Dale was whether these demo videos reflect some people's view of reality. I think it's a valid question.

But, as you mentioned, this particular video isn't a deomonstration of real fighting, it's instructional, making it a not so valid question.

If you're tired of the videos, that's cool. I think they offer some insight of how others interpret Wing Chun theory and principles.

My wearyness of internet videos stems from just that. I'm growing more interested in my interpetation of WC theory and principles.

[AmanuJRY]

Bill,

Also, to clear things up a little, I meant reality as in face to face, working on these things with a coach/sifu in the real world as opposed to the virtual one.

Yes, videos can provide insight, but it doesn't amount to a hill of beans without actually doing it, that's where real learning occurs. I could spend hours reviewing videos and learn a little or I can spend 30 min working things out with a group/partner and learn a lot.

Don't get me wrong, though. I've learned a lot from my Dan Duby dvds.

[Knifefighter]

But, as you mentioned, this particular video isn't a deomonstration of real fighting, it's instructional, making it a not so valid question.

It doesn't matter whether or not it is a demonstration.

My original thought was for people to deconstruct the various techniques shown on this clip and talk about which ones would or would not be high percetage techniques in a real fight.

I thought this would be a good opportunity to see the various thoughts people have in terms of the specific techniques from chi sao and their effectiveness or lack thereof. I thought this might also be a good opportunity for people to see why I have the perspective on chi sao that I do.

I was thinking we could have a discussion on actual technique before the usual flamethrowing begins.

Apparently, people prefer the threads that skip any prelimnaries that might have substance and just start with the flames.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I can't get to see the vid - what am I doing wrong?

Let me rephrase the question: what exactly do I have to do?

[marcus_pasram]

Victor,

Try this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkUSCVZXGg4.

I can't get to see the vid - what am I doing wrong?

Let me rephrase the question: what exactly do I have to do?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Thanks, Marcus....

So far just watched the first vid with Allan Jensen.

Let me be as diplomatic as possible about it (In other words...I'm not going to comment about what aspects of the chi sao that I think are lacking in good structure, technique, etc.)...

Instead I'll offer this:

Unless REAL FIGHT APPLICATIONS of those moves are also being taught to these sifus-to-be by Jensen (which aren't on the vid)....unless that's also included...

and unless those applications are actually being tested against live, resisting opponents who are SKILLED in other arts (and are using those arts, ie.- boxing, kickboxing, etc.)...then this first vid is a total waste of time.

AND IF THOSE MOVES ARE BEING TESTED in the manner that I described - and prove to be ineffective - then the vid is a waste for a second reason.

So I guess my question is: WHAT ARE THEY DOING WITH THIS STUFF?

Are they really putting it to a test?

Or what?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Just watched about the next 6-7-8 vids or so....And I think my questions have been answered.

I didn't see ANY real resistance being given by any of the secondary players in any of the vids. (Not to mention any quality boxing, kickboxing, etc.)

Therefore: While it's possible that some of the primary players are pretty good fighters in real life - you could never tell that from any of these vids.

Because these vids are all about marketing. PERIOD.

And I'm not just picking on the European WT people with these comments - very, very, very few wing chun vids from any style show any true (or close to true) reality fighting.

As I said on a different thread...at least 90% of wing chun is bull5hit.

But I'm still convinced that the remaining percentage is KICK-ASS.

[Knifefighter]

Victor, Victor, Victor-

You are breaking the rules. You have jumped right into the flamefest already.

We are supposed to break down and critique the individual techniques and explain why we think each is or is not applicable to a real situation.

Only later, do we get to blast on how it's all for marketing, not against resisting opponents, not against people from other styles, etc.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...

[Liddel]

My original thought was for people to deconstruct the various techniques shown on this clip and talk about which ones would or would not be high percetage techniques in a real fight.

I was thinking we could have a discussion on actual technique before the usual flamethrowing begins.

He seems to have no body power in most of his actions. This to me sez he's not able to have knock out power.
Which means if he punched you it would just **** you off.

One other factor that stands out to me is Timing. Unrealistic timing.
From action to reaction it seems slow. Meaning most actions are low percentage in a real situation if used the same way.

The punching is High percentage, you've always got a strickers chance
(trying to be balanced here)

Also turning his forearm from under the bridge to over, only then to tan and punch is overcomplicated and would never be able to be applied against a moving opponent.

Even non fighters have a natural reaction to move and or cover the head/face.


He had the choice of a more direct responce but decided to go the fancy way.
Nothing new to internet VT demos.

The young guy had timing issues also, Pak Sao is a universal parry IMO. Many other styles use similar actions for the same use. Its just a parry. From non contact or contact stage.

The young guy uses Pak Sao then one...two... oh the punch !

Any action in VT should only take a half sec at most to appply and catch the target.

Im still amazed and disappointed that most so called advanced practitioners still demo Chi or Poon Sao the most.

IMO Gor or Luk Sao are much closer to sparring and real life fighting than Chi or Poon Sao. They are un co-operative and can be near or full power, if your game .