Again, new videomaterial of Wong Shun Leung

[Matrix]

True. Don't forget the wing chun precept: nearest target, nearest weapon. The nearest weapon is frequently the one you've just hit with. One of the many reasons I think chain punching is overrated or plain old wrong.

Agreed on both counts. Chain punches as I've seen them used in Youtube videos are not the way to go, IMO. Of course, I could be wrong.

My MMA (boxing) coach said the jab should be an asking hand. Boxers will often hit with hook from the lead (jabbing) hand too with minimum drawing back... it's this kind of short-range wind up we need in chun too.

Sure. It may be 'asking' , "Would you like another?" . The short-range wind up is definitely in Wing Chun, and it's something that I'm working on myself. I'm getting better, but there's still lots of room for improvement. The idea that I try to keep in mind is that you don't need to 'wind up' at all. For one, it telegraphs your intent. 2nd, it takes energy and time unnecessarily. 3rd, you're actually hitting with your whole body, where your fist is really just the tip of the arrow so to speak.

Bill

[Mr Punch]

Yeah, I did think that perhaps wind-up wasn't the best expression, but I couldn't think of another.

[Matrix]

Not a problem. I knew what you meant, so it's all good.

Cheers,
Bill

[k gledhill]

to the lowly maggot ...vt is only training against vt ..vt doesnt fight vt..so we arent really confined to any vt rules just concepts and tactics that have no referee incase of infractions like I use a knife/s because 4 friends showed up to help you try to hurt me
...in training one should adopt a role to allow for this training so vt can function beyond stalemate ..it also opens your eyes to being on the recieving end and options ...going in a circle back to you being the vt attacker ...etc... best of both worlds...I always look for ways to hit /attack my students from outside ..many guys ive fought/hit, just start fights with simple charging attempted or actual wrist grabs [ ime ] so I do too for my students , if being the 'brawler' for sparring [ roles ]. A few guys Ive hit have come at me head down bobbing to grab me but I hit them full force with a vertical palm on top of the head ...so bobbing is good for taking the 'legal' face away for boxing , but I still hit the head and they stagger backwards holding their head etc for followups or hitting their mates rucking too...

Mr. Punch if you call me Keith again I will have to issue a DEATH MATCH

[sihing]

Hi,i would first like to point out i am a (lowly maggot) student of the wsl method. I would like to ask you mr peterson if i may about the above statement if i may.
My question is do you not think as 'practitioners of xyz' we are doing exactly the same? i mean based even on this thread alone the use for example of bob/slip/weave is frowned upon, yet in doing so we are restricting ourselves to 'wing chun rules of engagement' (which is as it should be - when i train wc i train wc equally when i train bjj i train bjj - i save the experimenting for throwdowns/meetups/private sparring) which is realistically why MOST wing chun practitioners become good at fighting/defending against other wing chun guys playing within the same 'rules of engagement'
what are your thoughts on this (if you care to share them of course)
Thanks for your time

I think it is wise to learn how to not "label" everything and think inside a little box (style xyz says don't do this, or only do that, bla bla bla). To be brief, and to use Sigung Wong again as a example, I read in a story where Sigung Wong was in a fight, and the finishing blow was a knee to the head. When it was over, his fellow students chastised his use of that technique, saying that he did not use "Wing Chun" to defeat his adversery. Sigung Wong replied, "I used the closest weapon to the nearest target, that is Wing Chun".

In practice you train very specific, and very deliberately in a pure WC form. Why? So that you can learn what it is teaching you, absorb it physically, get rid of bad habits, learn new one's and to totally understand every aspect of the system. Outside you use it as a tool, in whatever way you want, as it is not "Wing Chu" doing the fighting, rather it is "You" doing the fighting.

David,

I too would like to thank you for the two DVD's you produced, they were very well done, and I've learned a ton from them. If I can make it happen, hopefully I will see you soon at one of the seminars that are planned in the near future

James

[forever young]

to the lowly maggot ...vt is only training against vt ..vt doesnt fight vt..so we arent really confined to any vt rules just concepts and tactics that have no referee incase of infractions like I use a knife/s because 4 friends showed up to help you try to hurt me
...in training one should adopt a role to allow for this training so vt can function beyond stalemate ..it also opens your eyes to being on the recieving end and options ...going in a circle back to you being the vt attacker ...etc... best of both worlds...I always look for ways to hit /attack my students from outside ..many guys ive fought/hit, just start fights with simple charging attempted or actual wrist grabs [ ime ] so I do too for my students , if being the 'brawler' for sparring [ roles ]. A few guys Ive hit have come at me head down bobbing to grab me but I hit them full force with a vertical palm on top of the head ...so bobbing is good for taking the 'legal' face away for boxing , but I still hit the head and they stagger backwards holding their head etc for followups or hitting their mates rucking too...

Mr. Punch if you call me Keith again I will have to issue a DEATH MATCH

well i got to be honest im not too sure what it is you are saying but if you are saying what i think you are ie vt is only training against vt and a real altercation you arnt confined to any rules, if this is the case then this really dont answer the question and infact one is lead to ask why you think boxing is any different?

look i will say it like this. When you do chi sau you are agreeing whether explicitly or not to 'play' by certain 'rules' in order thast it remains chisau, yes/no ?

similarly when 'sparring' whatever the level of contact you are keeping it 'wing chun/ving tsun, yes/no?

so after reading

I think that you would have to agree that we (as Wing Chun devotees) have a definite advantage considering that we NEVER train or apply our skills with a set of "rules of engagement" in place, unlike the boxer who, by and large, is constantly working within the mental and physical restrictions placed on them by the rules of the sport.


DMP

my question is how is wing chun different than any other style in this regard ie: when boxers are boxing they box, when im doing wing chun i personally am not grappling im doing wing chun.
Now the general response seems to be 'but when fighting think outside the box/dont be confined/pidgeon holed' yet it seems that that is exactly what you do when (in this instance) talking of boxers

so while on the one hand it is being said how bob/weave are not workable options within the wing chun framework, people are saying things like

I think it is wise to learn how to not "label" everything and think inside a little box (style xyz says don't do this, or only do that, bla bla bla). To be brief, and to use Sigung Wong again as a example, I read in a story where Sigung Wong was in a fight, and the finishing blow was a knee to the head. When it was over, his fellow students chastised his use of that technique, saying that he did not use "Wing Chun" to defeat his adversery. Sigung Wong replied, "I used the closest weapon to the nearest target, that is Wing Chun".

and seemingly not seeing the parallels? how then are these two 'concepts' related (stick to wc/do what is neccesary) and how does this relate to in this instance boxing/boxers doing exactly the same?
Many thanks

[forever young]

or to rephrase it like this

I think that you would have to agree that we (as NHB devotees) have a definite advantage considering that we NEVER train or apply our skills with a set of "rules of engagement" in place, unlike the wing chun guy who, by and large, is constantly working within the mental and physical restrictions placed on them by the rules of the system.


DMP

re-quoted/edited my me

[forever young]

LOL, no-one has an answer for this question... I've been asking it quietly for years based on when my sifu modified his 'If it works, it's wing chun' adage into 'If it works, use it'!

..........................................

[sihing]

well i got to be honest im not too sure what it is you are saying but if you are saying what i think you are ie vt is only training against vt and a real altercation you arnt confined to any rules, if this is the case then this really dont answer the question and infact one is lead to ask why you think boxing is any different?

look i will say it like this. When you do chi sau you are agreeing whether explicitly or not to 'play' by certain 'rules' in order thast it remains chisau, yes/no ?

similarly when 'sparring' whatever the level of contact you are keeping it 'wing chun/ving tsun, yes/no?

so after reading

my question is how is wing chun different than any other style in this regard ie: when boxers are boxing they box, when im doing wing chun i personally am not grappling im doing wing chun.
Now the general response seems to be 'but when fighting think outside the box/dont be confined/pidgeon holed' yet it seems that that is exactly what you do when (in this instance) talking of boxers

so while on the one hand it is being said how bob/weave are not workable options within the wing chun framework people are saying things like
and seemingly not seeing the parallels? how then are these two 'concepts' related (stick to wc/do what is neccesary) and how does this relate to in this instance boxing/boxers doing exactly the same?
Many thanks

I think the first thing to realize is that there is never a answer to what if questions or technique vs technique, style vs style, concept vs concept type inquiry's.

On the street, you don't know what the fighting background is of your opponent. If I try and be passive/defensive in a effort to find out, then I will be dead in a quick minute. The idea is to win/overcome/destroy whomever is in front of you, so what do you do, or what does WC have to say about this? Well from my limited understanding, it says to be proactive, attack, always move forward, and hit, hit, and hit some more with all you can muster out of the body you have, with whatever weapons you have available to you on your body or that you can grab or that you can use from nature (tree, cliffs, man made structures, etc..). I don't care if he is a boxer and can bob and weave, or that he is a wrestler that is going to take me down. If you start worrying about those things then you have alread lost. Just do your thing, and hope the training/understanding that you have done in the past was enough to get you out of this situation alive and relatively unharmed.

You see there is a difference in training, as compared to application. Training is what we are talking about mostly around here. So when I chi sau, I am being specific in nature and working strictly on my "Wing Chun" habits, and not about fighting application, since the drill is far from a fighting nature. So yes, in chi sau there is a set of guidelines and if your partner goes out of them, then you are no longer doing chi sau. This is what you see mostly when people try to compete in chi sau comps, they start out rolling, and then lose all idea of what they are doing with the sole intention of hitting, in any and all ways, most of which is not WC related. The ego kicks in and people feel the need to do what they have to do to save face. The drill is not meant for that purpose but to teach specific things, in a specific way. All of WC is like this, but in application it is me that is fighting, not the art, and I choose what to use from it (by force of habit or unconsiousness, or by experience and wisdom in the art, all of this depends on time in, skill and experience using it in real situations, lots of variables to consider here). So if I am out of position or taken by surprise and unable to raise my hands up, guess what, I may bob and weave, duck, etc, to avoid a blow, since the natural instinct is always to move the head. God help me that the Wing Chun gods don't shoot a bolt of lightening upon me when I do that, lol.

For some reason, people on forums are looking for absolute answers to questions that are related to an activity that is far from predictable. The fact of the matter is, no one is invincible, everyone is vulnerable, no Martial Art guarantee's 100% success in a fight, training hard and understanding what you are doing is very important, guidance from someone with experience and skill is important, and all we can do is increase our chances in a fight by practicing a Martial Art. Also the fact is that most of us train in things that we ENJOY doing as a activity, rather than purely for the fighting effectiveness it gives us. I love training in WC, that is why I do, not because I need to learn to be a effective fighter, since I haven't (like 99.9% of the rest of us on this forum) had a fight or chance for a fight in years.

"Avoidance is the best thing to do, and learning art of invisibility is the best thing to learn if you don't want anything to do with violent physical confrontations." WSL quote..



James

[k gledhill]

Quote:
Originally Posted by k gledhill View Post
to the lowly maggot ...vt is only training against vt ..vt doesnt fight vt..so we arent really confined to any vt rules just concepts and tactics that have no referee incase of infractions like I use a knife/s because 4 friends showed up to help you try to hurt me
...in training one should adopt a role to allow for this training so vt can function beyond stalemate ..it also opens your eyes to being on the recieving end and options ...going in a circle back to you being the vt attacker ...etc... best of both worlds...I always look for ways to hit /attack my students from outside ..many guys ive fought/hit, just start fights with simple charging attempted or actual wrist grabs [ ime ] so I do too for my students , if being the 'brawler' for sparring [ roles ]. A few guys Ive hit have come at me head down bobbing to grab me but I hit them full force with a vertical palm on top of the head ...so bobbing is good for taking the 'legal' face away for boxing , but I still hit the head and they stagger backwards holding their head etc for followups or hitting their mates rucking too...

Mr. Punch if you call me Keith again I will have to issue a DEATH MATCH
well i got to be honest im not too sure what it is you are saying but if you are saying what i think you are ie vt is only training against vt and a real altercation you arnt confined to any rules, if this is the case then this really dont answer the question and infact one is lead to ask why you think boxing is any different?

look i will say it like this. When you do chi sau you are agreeing whether explicitly or not to 'play' by certain 'rules' in order thast it remains chisau, yes/no ?

similarly when 'sparring' whatever the level of contact you are keeping it 'wing chun/ving tsun, yes/no?

MY REPLY:
I am developing myself and my partner through the fighting system of VT as James wrote.
I help my partner in chi-sao to develop a line of thought ....

[forever young]

I think the first thing to realize is that there is never a answer to what if questions or technique vs technique, style vs style, concept vs concept type inquiry's.

On the street, you don't know what the fighting background is of your opponent. If I try and be passive/defensive in a effort to find out, then I will be dead in a quick minute. The idea is to win/overcome/destroy whomever is in front of you, so what do you do, or what does WC have to say about this? Well from my limited understanding, it says to be proactive, attack, always move forward, and hit, hit, and hit some more with all you can muster out of the body you have, with whatever weapons you have available to you on your body or that you can grab or that you can use from nature (tree, cliffs, man made structures, etc..). I don't care if he is a boxer and can bob and weave, or that he is a wrestler that is going to take me down. If you start worrying about those things then you have alread lost. Just do your thing, and hope the training/understanding that you have done in the past was enough to get you out of this situation alive and relatively unharmed.

You see there is a difference in training, as compared to application. Training is what we are talking about mostly around here. So when I chi sau, I am being specific in nature and working strictly on my "Wing Chun" habits, and not about fighting application, since the drill is far from a fighting nature. So yes, in chi sau there is a set of guidelines and if your partner goes out of them, then you are no longer doing chi sau. This is what you see mostly when people try to compete in chi sau comps, they start out rolling, and then lose all idea of what they are doing with the sole intention of hitting, in any and all ways, most of which is not WC related. The ego kicks in and people feel the need to do what they have to do to save face. The drill is not meant for that purpose but to teach specific things, in a specific way. All of WC is like this, but in application it is me that is fighting, not the art, and I choose what to use from it (by force of habit or unconsiousness, or by experience and wisdom in the art, all of this depends on time in, skill and experience using it in real situations, lots of variables to consider here). So if I am out of position or taken by surprise and unable to raise my hands up, guess what, I may bob and weave, duck, etc, to avoid a blow, since the natural instinct is always to move the head. God help me that the Wing Chun gods don't shoot a bolt of lightening upon me when I do that, lol.

For some reason, people on forums are looking for absolute answers to questions that are related to an activity that is far from predictable. The fact of the matter is, no one is invincible, everyone is vulnerable, no Martial Art guarantee's 100% success in a fight, training hard and understanding what you are doing is very important, guidance from someone with experience and skill is important, and all we can do is increase our chances in a fight by practicing a Martial Art. Also the fact is that most of us train in things that we ENJOY doing as a activity, rather than purely for the fighting effectiveness it gives us. I love training in WC, that is why I do, not because I need to learn to be a effective fighter, since I haven't (like 99.9% of the rest of us on this forum) had a fight or chance for a fight in years.

"Avoidance is the best thing to do, and learning art of invisibility is the best thing to learn if you don't want anything to do with violent physical confrontations." WSL quote..



James

1st off i must say that in general i agree with what you have written but it doesnt answer the question i asked dmp with regard to this statement

I think that you would have to agree that we (as Wing Chun devotees) have a definite advantage considering that we NEVER train or apply our skills with a set of "rules of engagement" in place, unlike the boxer who, by and large, is constantly working within the mental and physical restrictions placed on them by the rules of the sport.


DMP

my question is

My question is do you not think as 'practitioners of xyz' we are doing exactly the same? i mean based even on this thread alone the use for example of bob/slip/weave is frowned upon, yet in doing so we are restricting ourselves to 'wing chun rules of engagement'

especially with regard to

we NEVER train or apply our skills with a set of "rules of engagement"

. My contention is we are doing exactly what he (dmp) claims we never do so i was just wondering what mr peterson thought about this opposing view?

[forever young]

MY REPLY:
I am developing myself and my partner through the fighting system of VT as James wrote.
I help my partner in chi-sao to develop a line of thought ....

again while this is good and im glad for you and in accordance with what i regard the tool of chisau to be it dosnt answer the questions above
especially as the questions you quoted are all yes no questions

[k gledhill]

I dont think you understand my 'thinking' or you would understand my answer

you think chi-sao as a fight ?

[forever young]

I dont think you understand my 'thinking' or you would understand my answer

you think chi-sao as a fight ?

errrr no! i think that the fact english dosnt seem to be your first language that might be why your post seems to ramble (in english anyway )
im being honest here when i say

vt is only training against vt ..vt doesnt fight vt..so we arent really confined to any vt rules just concepts and tactics that have no referee incase of infractions like I use a knife/s because 4 friends showed up to help you try to hurt me
...in training one should adopt a role to allow for this training so vt can function beyond stalemate ..it also opens your eyes to being on the recieving end and options ...going in a circle back to you being the vt attacker ...etc... best of both worlds...I always look for ways to hit /attack my students from outside ..many guys ive fought/hit, just start fights with simple charging attempted or actual wrist grabs [ ime ] so I do too for my students , if being the 'brawler' for sparring [ roles ]. A few guys Ive hit have come at me head down bobbing to grab me but I hit them full force with a vertical palm on top of the head ...so bobbing is good for taking the 'legal' face away for boxing , but I still hit the head and they stagger backwards holding their head etc for followups or hitting their mates rucking too..

dosnt really make any sense in english (at least to me ) and it really dont have ANY bearing on the question i asked (and by the way you still havent answered in simple yes no terms the questions you quoted from me because if the answer is yes then my point is made if however it is no then just what are you pb boys doing

just for clarity (whch seems to be a problem around here.......)

yet in doing so we are restricting ourselves to 'wing chun rules of engagement'

this is my point !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your answer is when training we restrict ourselves to develop x skill (perhaps horse stance) or y concept (perhaps LSJC) but when we fight we shouldnt restrict ourselves then i would ask why you think boxers or for that matter ANY other art would do the same?

im NOT asking for a lecture on t3h r34l wing chun nor wsl nor lsjc nor whether i think chisau is fighting (which i really dont know where you extracted that from )
im asking some simple questions based on another persons (DMP'S) post not the square root of six million so if you dont have any answers then fair enough but say that rather than bluster with some 'you dont get it ' crap!

[k gledhill]

like I said ...you dont understand me

im responding in part to all posts , not just yours,... your ego is in your way ; )