If my WCK is good then I won't be taken down...

[YungChun]

Absolutely. I'll let anybody punch my open hand full force as I catch it. Been doing this for years. And folks don't have years to train such a thing, even if it would help enter and control which it doesn't. You have to grapple/clinch.. Staying disconnected from the opponent is inefficient; especially since time to control is critical.

That's fine for you Dale.. I personally think suggesting that a small person cover and take a hook on the hand that's covering the head is absurd.. There are better and saner ways to do that found in a multitude of systems.....

Bobbing and weaving definitely has its place...

Not when you need to enter and control and avoid getting dumped and/or kneed.

Has nothing to do with the training and everything to do with the structure.

Disagree.. The structure is great for the sport as it is.. If it was worth 2 cents in the street you would see tactical trainers al over the world, who focus on control and taking out the threats, no not always just being nice and cuffing them, using this kind of sport structure--you see no one using it for that--it's about crashing and smashing,.and/or subduing..

The old fashioned structure was done because they were not as advanced as today's fighters.

Structure used to match the needs of the activity... Take the gloves away now and you would see major structure changes.. Broken hands do not win fights, horizontal fists are less stable, taking power shots on the back of the hand is nuts---do I really need to say this?

Law enforcement is about subduing and controlling a suspect, not about taking him out with punches and kicks. Law enforcement personnel have to control and subdue...

Crash and smash is the most efficient means of combat.. Tactical trainers train taking threats out as well as control...

I find it amusing that you think adding the hand wraps and large gloves would not have a huge affect on the method used and structure used.. The evidence says otherwise as does common sense IMO.

[Matrix]

No, my point was that the theoretical guys make too big a deal about structure.

Sounds like you're making a big deal about it now, when you "Has nothing to do with the training and everything to do with the structure." Interesting....

[Knifefighter]

Sounds like you're making a big deal about it now, when you "Has nothing to do with the training and everything to do with the structure." Interesting....

OK, forget about calling structure. I'm just trying to use your vocabulary to describe what I would more normally call technique.

[Matrix]

OK, forget about calling structure. I'm just trying to use your vocabulary to describe what I would more normally call technique.

Dale,
Thank you accomodating me with the terminology. I also appreciate the selective reasoning. It's classic.

Bill

[Knifefighter]

That's fine for you Dale.. I personally think suggesting that a small person cover and take a hook on the hand that's covering the head is absurd..
There are better and saner ways to do that found in a multitude of systems.....

When you are being overwhelmed with punches and taking shots to the head, what is this better and saner suggested defense?

Not when you need to enter and control and avoid getting dumped and/or kneed.

Like the cover, bobbing and weaving is used when you are taking punishment from punches, not when you are entering to control.

Disagree.. The structure is great for the sport as it is.. If it was worth 2 cents in the street you would see tactical trainers al over the world, who focus on control and taking out the threats, no not always just being nice and cuffing them, using this kind of sport structure--you see no one using it for that--it's about crashing and smashing,.and/or subduing..

Completely different scenario... crashing and smashing is all about having, weapons, superior numbers and controlling suspects.

Take a law enforcement guy without a weapon and tell him he has to "subdue" someone who is as skilled or more skilled than he is in a one-on-one situation and the crash and subdue won't work anymore. More than likely, it will get him KTFO.

Again, I will point you to Kimbo as another good example for this. Watch his fight against Gannon. Gannon is a trained police officer. He would have loved to crash and smash Kimbo and get the fight over quickly. However, he couldn't do this in a one-on-one, non surprise situation because Kimbo is big, strong, and skilled.

Structure used to match the needs of the activity... Take the gloves away now and you would see major structure changes.. Broken hands do not win fights, horizontal fists are less stable, taking power shots on the back of the hand is nuts---do I really need to say this?

Have you watched the Kimbo fights? Those are perfect examples that you don't know what you are talking about.

Crash and smash is the most efficient means of combat.. Tactical trainers train taking threats out as well as control...

Only when you can surpise or overwhelm your opponent. Doesn't work if your opponent is ready or is as good or better than you are.

I find it amusing that you think adding the hand wraps and large gloves would not have a huge affect on the method used and structure used.. The evidence says otherwise as does common sense IMO.

Theory says that things might change... evidence (actual fighting) says otherwise.

Common sense should come from what acutally happens, rather than what theoretically should happen.

[Knifefighter]

Dale,
Thank you accomodating me with the terminology. I also appreciate the selective reasoning. It's classic.

I'm not sure what the problem is here Bill. Let me explain my POV view of structure.

To me structure is just a buzzword to describe the basic ways your body is positioned in different postitions that allows you to perform techniques in an efficient manner.

Structure changes depending on your goals and is just part of your techniques. For example, in BJJ I have a different structure if I have side control and I want to arm bar someone vs. wanting to just control him. In standup, my structure will be different if I am grappling vs. if I am striking vs. if I am doing both. In grappling, my structure is different if I want to do an upper body Greco Roman clinch vs. a leg attack. I will have different structures for each position and different structures for different goals.

Structure was probably not the word to best describe what I was talking about. Instead of "boxing structure", I should have said "boxing approach".

[t_niehoff]

When you are being overwhelmed with punches and taking shots to the head, what is this better and saner suggested defense?

Exactly. And yes, lots of "systems" tell you to do something different -- and that's why they don't work against good people. Anyone that gets in and goes at 100% will see that for themselves. But if you never do that, then you go around believing that those "other things" work.

Like the cover, bobbing and weaving is used when you are taking punishment from punches, not when you are entering to control.

Correct.

Have you watched the Kimbo fights? Those are perfect examples that you don't know what you are talking about.

Almost every fihgt will show he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Only when you can surpise or overwhelm your opponent. Doesn't work if your opponent is ready or is as good or better than you are.

That attitide comes from working with scrubs and/or theory. The reality is as you describe.

Theory says that things might change... evidence (actual fighting) says otherwise.

Common sense should come from what acutally happens, rather than what theoretically should happen.

One reason for why people seeking to develop fighting skills need to train/spar with quality opponents at 100% is simply to come to appreciate what is involved in fighting. Because you can't really even begin to address the problems of fighting until you really know what they are. And that knowledge only comes from seeing those problems firsthand. What you get when you don't do this are people who believe they know what's going on, but they don't.

[t_niehoff]

Yeah the question he wants to hear:

Why do all those MMA guys always loop over my chain punches and knock me out?

The question he does hear:

Since you say everything in the system sucks what part of the system do you actually use in fighting?

The funny thing is he would answer both these questions, and any others, the same way: "You don't understand what WCK is", "the theory is BS" , "you need to get KOd more often by good fighters.." and "it doesn't matter what I do, I'm not you.."

You still don't get it. First, there is no "system". That's BS. Second, when I fight standing up, I do WCK. Not parts of it. WCK. You can't ask a boxer "what parts of boxing do you use?" This is a meaningless question and shows that the person asking doesn't understand what boxing is. He just boxes. As I already told you, my WCK is a method of close range, inside, dirty boxing. I use the basic WCK method (faat): dap, jeet, chum, saat (join, close him down, break his structure, finish him). How I do that, what tools I use, depends on the resistances I get, on what the opponent does.

Your trouble is that you don't see that there is a process to developing good fighting skill, regardless of the style, and that the answers you want only come from going through that process and are individual.

[YungChun]

Completely different scenario... crashing and smashing is all about having, weapons, superior numbers and controlling suspects.

According to you..

According to Blauer it's about intercepting and shutting them down.. It's also about dealing with surprise attacks, sucker punches, the SPEAR is the concept of entry and shutting them down... Not for when you have superior anything, for when the schit hits the fan...

Entering and jamming is higher percentage vs. doing the opposite, you attack on their prep.. And they train this stuff at full intensity... Check out his site...

Again, I will point you to Kimbo as another good example for this. Watch his fight against Gannon. Gannon is a trained police officer. He would have loved to crash and smash Kimbo and get the fight over quickly. However, he couldn't do this in a one-on-one, non surprise situation because Kimbo is big, strong, and skilled.

Don't know the fighter but I am sure he wasn't trained in SPEAR....

Ah yes, LEOs SHOULD ask suspects if they are MMAs first that way they can aviod getting their butts kicked in when they try their silly theorectical moves...

It's not about what works 100%--nothing does-- it's what works more of the time...shutting them down, taking their balance and attacking is it...clinchwork...

And for covering I wouldn't advise the hand to cover, rather the elbow bent up over the side of the head--similar to MT--this is what is used for cover and again to enter, jam and attack... Disagree, then argue with Blauer..

[YungChun]

You still don't get it. First, there is no "system". That's BS.

No there is--your POV is BS..

Second, when I fight standing up, I do WCK. Not parts of it. WCK.

Everything mentioned about the system you have implied sucks so I am just trying to find out what you use, since I assume you don't use the parts that suck...

[YungChun]

Your trouble is that you don't see that there is a process

Process?

Wow I thought good WCK came in pill form.. Did they stop making those or something?

to developing good fighting skill, regardless of the style, and that the answers you want only come from going through that process and are individual.

Yes there is a process--it's called the system, system=process... But since you have thrown out the system and process you seem to suggest that there is no process you just get out there and do it... That's not a process or how one refines skills, you need a real progressive, totalistic process, a system of perfecting each skill subset--perfection work. Say it with me S Y S T E M...

What about your method makes it different from other arts--what about your method tactics makes you feel what you do is WCK? Did you make up your own definition of what you think WCK is?

[Matrix]

I'm not sure what the problem is here Bill. Let me explain my POV view of structure.

To me structure is just a buzzword to describe the basic ways your body is positioned in different postitions that allows you to perform techniques in an efficient manner.

Structure changes depending on your goals and is just part of your techniques.

Dale,
I certainly agree with your description on this issue - it's precise and concise. I just think we can get hung up on terminology. If there is a problem, it's that we bust each others chops over these words. We are more concenred about being "right" then finding out "the truth". Quite frankly, I just want improve my game. The problem with words is that they are abstractions, and depending on our experience we will assign different attributes to the words that we see as either negative or positive. In other words, we can use the same word and have totally different reaction to the term. Of course we need to use words to express ourselves and that's where it can get complicated. I just think we can cut each other a little slack and understand that there's some room for interpretation. If we go into a discussion expecting confrontation, it will be a self-fulfiling prophecy.

If you or Terence have some ideas I can use, I'm all for it. The Ignore List that seems to becoming trendy is a big mistake IMO. The funny thing is that when you take the time to get out and meet of the people on this forum, you will find that they are much different than their Internet persona. In genereal, you will find that you have in common than you may think, and that discussing things within a mutual respect framework will make you bother better people from that experience.

Structure was probably not the word to best describe what I was talking about. Instead of "boxing structure", I should have said "boxing approach".

OK, that's fine by me. Wing chun is Chinese boxing.

I hope that we can meet some time so that I can better understand your position.

Peace,
Bill

[Knifefighter]

According to you..

According to Blauer it's about intercepting and shutting them down.. It's also about dealing with surprise attacks, sucker punches, the SPEAR is the concept of entry and shutting them down... Not for when you have superior anything, for when the schit hits the fan...

Entering and jamming is higher percentage vs. doing the opposite, you attack on their prep.. And they train this stuff at full intensity... Check out his site...

Don't know the fighter but I am sure he wasn't trained in SPEAR.... .

LOL... SPEAR has it's place. I've had an interest in it for a long time and been playing around with it in a number of different full contact settings for many years now. I like it because a variation of it seems to work pretty well to help get an overwrap from a surprise knife attack.

But let's see you use it against a fighter who is using back/lateral movement and throwing bombs at you.

I guarantee you, a halfway decent boxer will pick you apart if you try to do this.

But, don't take my word for it (or Tony's, for that matter). Gear up and try to use it full contact against some decent guys who won't let you close the gap. You'll quickly find out for yourself what its strong points and limitations are.

[stricker]

, don't take my word for it (or Tony's, for that matter). Gear up and try to use it full contact against some decent guys

you been getting forum-fu lessons of terence?

terence,

when you train is there or what is the difference between sparring at 100% and fighting (as in a thai boxing fight, or mma fight etc)?

[Liddel]

Nice to see this thread going somewhere.....

From my own direct experience with friends that are in Law enforcement and a family member that is in the NZ SAS.

The general boxing cover or guard, is used in bare H2H fights often. Its the primary building block in thier CQB tool box.

IMO Jim is right in the sence that with bare hands, a punch can land on your head in the gap between your forearm and bicep which is normally to small when wearing gloves...But with bare hands...KA BLAM... it CAN get through.
So with bare hands they use the same tool, just adapted (little more angle etc) for the specific situation/circumstance.

It may be different for other countries, but this is how it is in NZ.

DREW