Footwork or retreat?

[Phil Redmond]

Phil,

How do you define ego? I define ego as a entity of the mind that produces a false identity, of superiority, of being special, of having to be different from common mankind. I find it interesting that anyone that admits to loving fighting is lacking in ego, but to each their own (just to clear the record, I feel the thrill of combat as well, that is why I avoid it at all costs.) If I told you that all of us are special, all of us are common, and that anything and everything you do, is not a reflection of who you are, would you believe that?

Good journey's dude, I only wish you the best in the future and in health

James

Ego;
noun, plural e·gos.
1. the “I” or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.
2. Psychoanalysis. the part of the psychic apparatus that experiences and reacts to the outside world and thus mediates between the primitive drives of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment.
3. egotism; conceit; self-importance: Her ego becomes more unbearable each day.
4. self-esteem or self-image; feelings: Your criticism wounded his ego.
5. (often initial capital letter) Philosophy.
a. the enduring and conscious element that knows experience.
b. Scholasticism. the complete person comprising both body and soul.
6. Ethnology. a person who serves as the central reference point in the study of organizational and kinship relationships.

I more relate to the 1st definition of the word ego. Yes, I am self aware and I do distinguish myself from others as do most humans.
Does a mountain climber have ego because he wants to challenge himself? Maybe. Does a sky diver have ego because he enjoys the thrill and danger of the jump? Do the people who dive with sharks have ego?
Does the soldier who trains for combat and goes willingly have ego?
Does the fighter who wants to see if what he trains in works in the real world have ego? The answer could be yes or no. It just so happens that some people love to test their limitations and are not satisfied with living in a safe theoretical world. Thank you for your good wishes. I wish the same for all people.

[bennyvt]

I was not saying you should step back when not in contact. This should only be done when your eblow goes too close or your structure or stance is being lost. The step gives you the chance to regain your space.
Not all fighting is about ego. As far as I know WSL was some what famous for his challenge matches, he also told his students that they should do it too. I know that WSL, my teachers teacher, and your teach (gary Lam) had several. This is the only way to test if VT works. Of course you can make it work against VT people you know exactly what they will do. They hit in the centre so you block in the centre. The real world people throw them from all angles and the size and strength differences change what techniques can be used. This does not have to be about ego. Barry told us stories were they would be having lunch and doing hoon sao under the table and the cooks would notice. They would arrange a match, if you won they gave food for the next week, if you lost you did something for them. They sat and disscussed what happened and learnt from them, this is not ego this is using VT for what it is for, testing the effectiveness. WSL used to say " VT is a sophisticated system of combat, nothing else. If you want to learn self defence dont learn VT. Unless you are prepared to fight to win you will lose" (not exact words but pretty close)

[Phil Redmond]

Some of the students from Duncan Leung's school were training for full contact matches at Madison Square Garden. I was asked to be a sparring partner because the other sparring partners needed a break. I had done hours of chi sao and forms. Anyone who trained at the Great Jones school knows how tough the training was there. Since I was training hard plus the was allowed to wear an Everlast headgear that protected the front of the face I thought being a sparring partner would be fun. Well, I got hit with a full power blow that rocked me big time. My game plan went out the window after that. There's a saying that goes, "Everyone has a plan until they get hit". After that incident I wondered that if got hit hard in a real situation would I be able to continue or would I b1*ch up. That's what got me into full contact fighting. Not ego.

[sihing]

I was not saying you should step back when not in contact. This should only be done when your eblow goes too close or your structure or stance is being lost. The step gives you the chance to regain your space.

Agreed, if your structure is being collapsed you toi ma (pushed step) to regain the space, but at the sametime you are still able to hit with structure and power.

Not all fighting is about ego. As far as I know WSL was some what famous for his challenge matches, he also told his students that they should do it too. I know that WSL, my teachers teacher, and your teach (gary Lam) had several. This is the only way to test if VT works.

I agree that testing what you are doing, which IMO is a requirement if you want to be functional with your WC/VT, is not about ego. As far as I understand it, WSL would accept beimo fights to test his abilities, this is still not the same as a real self defence situation, as there are rules and respect for the opponent during beimo fights, not so during when someone attacks you randomly. My point was, lots of people look at sparring and testing as the be all end all, plus they get a high out of it when they defeat someone in sparring. Sparring IMO is testing the non contact aspect of your ability to bridge the gap and safely enter the range where WC/VT is used. It is an important part of the training, if you understand properly what it is there for. Just like everything else in training, it is just there to make you more functional, rather than looked upon as the end result of your training.

Of course you can make it work against VT people you know exactly what they will do. They hit in the centre so you block in the centre. The real world people throw them from all angles and the size and strength differences change what techniques can be used. This does not have to be about ego. Barry told us stories were they would be having lunch and doing hoon sao under the table and the cooks would notice. They would arrange a match, if you won they gave food for the next week, if you lost you did something for them. They sat and disscussed what happened and learnt from them, this is not ego this is using VT for what it is for, testing the effectiveness. WSL used to say " VT is a sophisticated system of combat, nothing else. If you want to learn self defence dont learn VT. Unless you are prepared to fight to win you will lose" (not exact words but pretty close

Like I said in one of my posts, I was being specific. If you want to improve your "Wing Chun" skills, you practice it with other WC people. If you want to improve your fighting skills you fight. WC IMO is a training system, not a application system, there's a difference here. WSL said if you want to learn self defence, learn the art of invisibility, since we can't do that, the next best thing is to avoid it all cost, so far this strategy has worked for me. I for the most part practice WSL VT because I love it, it gives me pleasure to participate in the activity and to spread the teaching as well and making new friends is the best part That's it. I haven't even had the chance to use my skills in the real world in over 10 yrs, that is because I don't look for trouble. If you are, you will find it The self defence skills were learned many years ago, my learning in WSL VT has only improved the effectiveness of those skills 10 fold.
Of course if someone attacks me, I will do what I need to do to overcome them in defending myself, but I wouldn't call it "winning", as that gives the impression that there was some sort of competition going on. In street defence that is never the case, you survive and hopefully walk away from it with as little injury as possible. Sometimes that is not always the case

James

P.S. I've heard many great things about Sifu Barry. I hope he is recovering well from his accident

[Liddel]

I think you both have a point.

Have you actually fought a guy bigger and stronger than you Ali ?
You look like you have size on your side from the vids ive seen of you.

Obviously its situation dependent.

Ive seen two cops jump on a 120 KG Samoan after another cop snap kicked his groin and peppered sprayed him. IT MADE HIM ANGRY !

As much as i believe in martials arts and technique in fighting....sadly the truth is IMO... size and strength does matter, its not the be all and end all but it is an advantage at the very least.

DREW

[Phil Redmond]

I think you both have a point.

Have you actually fought a guy bigger and stronger than you Ali ?
You look like you have size on your side from the vids ive seen of you.

Obviously its situation dependent.

Ive seen two cops jump on a 120 KG Samoan after another cop snap kicked his groin and peppered sprayed him. IT MADE HIM ANGRY !

As much as i believe in martials arts and technique in fighting....sadly the truth is IMO... size and strength does matter, its not the be all and end all but it is an advantage at the very least.

DREW

You're right Drew. Ali is 6'4"- 6'6". I don't know the metric....lol.
The situation with that Samoan happens all the time. I've seen big guys go nuts in clubs and fight off the security. When you combine size and adrenalin size matters regardless of what anyone says. It's simple physics.

[Liddel]

To take this a little further and to keep on topic...

Do you appraoch (mentally/physically) bigger opponents differently than same size guys ?

What are some of the tactics and/or strategies of VT i might see the two of you employ against a much bigger/stronger opponent ?

I think keeping/maintaining good distance, being even further than what you would use with a similar sized opponent, is important. (keeping to the original post ) Stepping back maintaining distance at first.

Im not staying away all the time of course - because i must get close to attack, so Bridging in and out must be quicker and more effective, i tend to be more mobile.

My heaviest actions are my right hand and elbows which i look to set up off knee stomps/kicks and VT jabs which if done clean are very sucessful against bigger guys than me.....

I dropped a tough KBer friend of mine with a good knee shot off a punch, whos bigger by
30 - 40 pounds and stronger. But im sharper...inch power.

DREW

[couch]

For me, it's about bringing down larger opponents at the knees. If I were to have the distance, a well-placed kick would either bring the opponent down or hopefully "stop-hit" them in a fashion for a good follow-up.

Theorizing over ,
Kenton

[Graychuan]

Everything in a fight is relative. Don't live in a box. You definitely don't want to charge down the middle of an extremely larger opponent though.

Anyone ever watch a Matador vs. a Bull in a Bullfight?

Funny thing is...if the Matador turns and runs, or steps back...its his @$$. Usually you see these guys hold thier ground. Can't put the saber in the neck if you are moving back. And these guys examplify 'grace under pressure'. Nothing 'controlled' about that environment.

On the other hand...its always the Rodeo 'Clowns' that run away and get thrown, trampled or impaled.

Now that I think about it...Id love to see a Matador learn some Wing Chun Kung Fu and have the same mentality as when he is staring down the eyes of a charging Angus.


Love, Peace & Chitlin' Grease,
~Cg~

[CFT]

It really isn't comparable. The bull is a quadruped with 'limited' offensive capabilities namely it's horns, mass and speed. It has a certain amount of agility but can't slip and turn as quickly as a human. It doesn't engage in deceit/feinting so it is almost like a train on a track. If the matador is reading the bull's posture correctly then he should be on top of the situation.

I'd like to see a human go barehanded against an enraged gorilla or chimpanzee.

[k gledhill]

primates go straight for the nutz and bite , biting off testicles , biting off fingers and anything else they get hold of....not nice ..ergo rules of engagement ...we 'higher minded' primates have rules.

dont eat the opponent and or rip his nutz off : rules eh ?

Id rather face a bull than a monkey or a gorilla any day , gored or eaten ,hmmmm let me think SLAP !! dont think RUN

[Graychuan]

... If the matador is reading the bull's posture correctly then he should be on top of the situation...

And there is absolutely no reason why this is not true of two men facing each other in a fight. Why be conflicted? Fear and indecisiveness are mind-killers.
You either face the attack and fight or you turn and run (flight) Trying to do both will just make you a dear in the headlights.

[couch]

primates go straight for the nutz and bite , biting off testicles , biting off fingers and anything else they get hold of....not nice ..ergo rules of engagement ...we 'higher minded' primates have rules.

dont eat the opponent and or rip his nutz off : rules eh ?

Id rather face a bull than a monkey or a gorilla any day , gored or eaten ,hmmmm let me think SLAP !! dont think RUN

Don't think...run...is right!

It's not fight or flight...it's flight OVER flight. We lasted this long because we (as humans) felt a greater need in the pit of our being to run than stand and fight the lions, tigers and bears.

Oh my!

[Ali. R]

It really isn't comparable. The bull is a quadruped with 'limited' offensive capabilities namely it's horns, mass and speed. It has a certain amount of agility but can't slip and turn as quickly as a human. It doesn't engage in deceit/feinting so it is almost like a train on a track. If the matador is reading the bull's posture correctly then he should be on top of the situation.

I'd like to see a human go barehanded against an enraged gorilla or chimpanzee.

Being mentally ready is the ideal of engagement far as fighting up the middle (grace under pressure), either you stand there or you don’t, it’s your choice fight or run and reset, and watch your opponents momentum snow ball down hill into something that you will never begin to control… Stop it in its infancy before it reaches it’s incline…

If the matador is reading the bull's posture correctly then he should be on top of the situation.

Everything that you said about the matador and bull is correct, but there are people out there that are just as bad as the bull when it comes to: agility, can't slip, doesn't engage in deceit/feinting; that's been fighting for years, and I can count them on two sets of hands…

But yet, man is much smaller then the bull… I find that very ironic that one will stand up to a bull, but not a bigger man…



Ali Rahim.

[WoodenYummy]

Come on guys, I think you're being incredibly simplisitc if you are saying any type of step (other than forward) should be considered "flight" or running away. Name a single fight, MMA or Boxing, where the fighters NEVER stepped backwards or to the side. Its a bit ridiculous, it happens all the time, in every fight I've ever seen... Distance is key, you don't just "stand your ground" like a statue. I think that suggetion is a little absurd. I do see the point you are making about needing to have "heart" to fight, you certainly can't be thinking about running from a bigger guy and still have the confidence to win. I think you just went a little overboard on the analogies there at the end... Courage & Grace under pressure are definately very, if not the most, important factors in those situations, but I don't think thery're incompatible with using footwork to be elusive. Structure can only withstand so much, better structure can withstand more pressure than a poorer structure, but it still only goes so far... Getting hit by a bus is "getting hit by a bus" no matter how slow its moving, or how correct your structure is. Thats my 2 cents anyway.