Brief clip of Alan Jensen

[Jim Roselando]

Hey guys,


Check out the skeletal integrity of Chu Shong Tin. More vectors and able to handle pressure without having to run around it because of being weak:

http://www.wingchun.com.au/videos_wi...ighting1.shtml


Peace,
Jim

[YungChun]

Yong Chun,


I was under the impression that you approved of the training becauses of your post:

Yes, I approve of correct WCK sensitivity training.. It's how WCK, in part, is
trained.

The post addressed, just that, WCK sensitivity training, and not anyone's in particular and didn't say without a "support system", which I assume, implies "without structure."

[Jim Roselando]

Hello,


We can agree to disagree. Sensativity training is whole body involvement and not just needling like flowery pillows IMO. What good are all those refernce points and transitions without the above? Both Chu Shong Tin and Ken show a clearly different form of body sensativity. You just cannot do one without the other.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekX7gbZJ5b8


Regards,

[YungChun]

Hello,


We can agree to disagree. Sensativity training is whole body involvement and not just needling like flowery pillows IMO. What good are all those refernce points and transitions without the above? Both Chu Shong Tin and Ken show a clearly different form of body sensativity. You just cannot do one without the other.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekX7gbZJ5b8


Regards,

Jim, I fail to see where I said that sensitivity training does not involve whole body involvement....

I also fail to see where I wrote or implied "needling like flowery pillows"...

In fact I wrote that WCK emphasizes training feeling and kinesthetic awareness as well as use of proper structure..

Where are you getting this from???

If you are going to disagree with something I wrote that is fine with me, however I expect to have written it in the first place.. Please quote something specific I wrote if you wish to disagree and not "put words in my posts.."

[Jim Roselando]

Yung Chon,


Jim, I fail to see where I said that sensitivity training does not involve whole body involvement....

I also fail to see where I wrote or implied "needling like flowery pillows"...

In fact I wrote that WCK emphasizes training feeling and kinesthetic awareness as well as use of proper structure..


I wrote earlier:


I was under the impression that you approved of the training becauses of your post:

Yes, I approve of correct WCK sensitivity training.. It's how WCK, in part, is
trained.

The post addressed, just that, WCK sensitivity training,


I was under the impression that we were talking about this particular footage? I was also under the impression that you said you approved and I was stating my opinions on this footage. So, just to smooth out the discussion (since I seem to be confused ), do you approve or not approve of the practitioners performance we are talking about?






Regards,

[YungChun]

I was under the impression that we were talking about this particular footage? I was also under the impression that you said you approved and I was stating my opinions on this footage. So, just to smooth out the discussion (since I seem to be confused ), do you approve or not approve of the practitioners performance we are talking about?

No, I also wrote two posts ago:

The post addressed, just that, WCK sensitivity training, and not anyone's in particular and didn't say without a "support system", which I assume, implies "without structure."

Much of the recent discussion here and elsewhere was about sticking training in general, and there seems to be much confusion about the purpose of this training in general. As I attempted to convey before my comments were on WCK sticking training in general and not anyone's in particular!

As to this footage I only glanced at it.. I will watch again when I get a chance...

[Jim Roselando]

Hey YC,


I watched the footage and then posted. I never read the entire thread so I may be off on this! Look forward to your thoughts on the footage.


Peace,

[stricker]

andrew, thanks for the clip. what did you make of it?

knifefighter, when i said about tapping out white belts i was saying about this thread, not the main clip but a lot of the others linked off it showing applications stuff. theyre so easy to criticise as theyre never skilled opponents but people who think a takedown is flaling around bending over at the waist etc never know basic boxers defense or footwork no wrestling or clinch experience etc and generally just roll over and play dead after a couple of chain punches.

as for the alan jensen chi sao clip his head and shoulder posture did seem off but i foundn it more interesting to watch his hips. it looked like he was taking pressure to the ground at certain points before moving round it then staying on etc. also could be he can get away with looking lazy upper body, depends what the partner is giving him etc there were a few moments id like to see what happened if the partner stepped in instead of backing off or staying neutral.

also bear in mind what andrew said he has students fighting etc maybe more than meets the eye

im looking forward to watching Jim Roselandos clip when i get the chance

[Jim Roselando]

Stricker,


Search the old threads!

I started one about a year ago requesting to see more people show what they do. You can find a clip there if you want to see my smiling face.




I'm not shy amigo!




Peace,

[stricker]

cool will do man. cant watch vids right now as im on work time

ps did you watch his hips what did you pick anything up there?

[Ultimatewingchun]

I still don't get the intent of this thread; that is, the turn that Dale is trying to give it...

All those vids are meaningless without the applications in real time being drilled/sparred with the proper intensity and spontaneity.

Otherwise the chi sao we saw is just a dance form and the other "demo sparring" vids just marketing - all style and no substance.

Is Dale asking whether or not lop sao, pak sao, tan sao, bong sao, etc....ie.- WING CHUN...is useful in real fighting? Is that it?

If so...the answer is YES...at very close range - and in certain fighting situations...

and as long it's seamlessly integrated into the rest of your arsenal both from short range and especially from longer distances - like using hooks, uppercuts, front kicks, roundhouse kicks, longer reaching straight leads and crosses, etc....as well as a more dynamic broken rhythm and stepping than what is "normally" associated with the typical wing chun "just rush in there" footwork - no matter how "explosive"....

Otherwise you can have all the proper body structure, vectors, trapping, and blah blah blah you want - and it still won't work very well in a real fight against a skilled fighter.

[stricker]

coast clear

first impression the "realistic fighting seminar" one showed amazing body mechanics but taking the **** about "realistic fighting"

a guy that skinny and you can really see how he uses skeletal structure

take those body mechanics add some timing footwork and realistic applications now we're talking

need to go over them a few more times... thanks tho might be some little gems in there

[Knifefighter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekX7gbZJ5b8

There’s one glaring problem with what was demonstrated on that clip.

Many of those techs shown give a wrestler the set for a clinch, take down or throw.

Someone without a wrestling background may not realize this and inadvertently give the grappler exactly what he wants.

[gabe]

There’s one glaring problem with what was demonstrated on that clip.

Many of those techs shown give a wrestler the set for a clinch, take down or throw.

Someone without a wrestling background may not realize this and inadvertently give the grappler exactly what he wants.

Yup, and you don't figure these things out unless you cross-fight. If they can do this and prevent the clinch, takedown or throw, then that's impressive. I don't think analysis comes down to what works or what doesn't work, it's really who executes first. Just a thought.

[Edmund]

There’s one glaring problem with what was demonstrated on that clip.

Many of those techs shown give a wrestler the set for a clinch, take down or throw.

Someone without a wrestling background may not realize this and inadvertently give the grappler exactly what he wants.

Of course they don't realise this... It's not like WC people are all experts in wrestling. They aren't going to gear their style to counter something they don't know much about.