Mixing Wing Chun with a grappling style?

[vingtsunplaya]

Ok, I'm going to say it one more time, but this time I'll say it DIRECTLY to the person to whom it applies: Hendrick, please don't waste space/time here with your posts unless you actually have something a) coherent b) on topic and finally c) in proper English. It really pi$$es us all off when we have to wade through your sh1t postings. Van Helsing? Really? Dracula, werewolves? Come on bro. We are talking about reality here. By the way, shall we start a thread about fighting while flying throught the air (like in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon)?!?! That would apply to this conversation about as much as all that other sh1t.

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$. Best of luck to you bro...

[Ned]

Disclaimer: this is not a reply directed toward T, so he doesn't need to apply.

Last post:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling." It is a artifical, unrealistic exercise that can be used to teach and practice some elements of WCK's method of fighting, which is a combination of striking and grappling.

Previous post:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
WCK is to control the opponent while striking him. To control an opponent requires "grappling". Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

Another previous one:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last post:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't for fighting and won't develop fighting skills. Nor does it have anything to do with a "certain time-frame." If you fought as part of your training, you'd see that.

Again:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.

Sounds like fighting to me...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
But then:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't a "moment", it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

But wait, that's not right either:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Grappling is being in contact and trying to physically manipulate your opponent to reach your objective. That's what wrestlers do, that's what judoka do, that's what sumo wrestlers do,and that's what we do in WCK -- except we add strikesto the mix. Chi sao is similar to a wreslter's handfighting.

and lastly again:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao isn't "a form of stand-up grappling."

Which is it, is it grappling and striking (fighting), or is it an excersize? Is it wrestler's handfighting or is it a useless unrealistic excersize?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
oh wait, one more time:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is grappling with striking. Sustained contact is grappling.

and
Previous post:

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Chi sao is "grappling". Lop sao is "grappling". Those drills teach you how to mix grappling (controlling) and striking.

Or, was it

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
...it is an artificial, unrealistic exercise.

Is it an excersize that teaches useful fighting skills or unrealistic excersize?
Is it grappling or isn't it?
Is it for fighting or isn't it?
No wonder there's confusion...

yeah.. spoken like an out of work St. L. lawyer with plenty of time to self-contridcit and blow!

[Mr Punch]

Ok, ... Best of luck to you bro...

Great Playa, bro. Another munchkin to tell us how it is. What were you saying about on topic?

[Mr Punch]

Last post:


Previous post:


Another previous one:

I'm not joining the debate: and I like T's views (it was his posting style that always ****ed me off)... but anyway, JPinAz: that post was ****ing hilarious!

[Hendrik]

You dont have to read my post right? ignore it if my music is not fitting you. Thanks

Ok, I'm going to say it one more time, but this time I'll say it DIRECTLY to the person to whom it applies: Hendrick, please don't waste space/time here with your posts unless you actually have something a) coherent b) on topic and finally c) in proper English. It really pi$$es us all off when we have to wade through your sh1t postings. Van Helsing? Really? Dracula, werewolves? Come on bro. We are talking about reality here. By the way, shall we start a thread about fighting while flying throught the air (like in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon)?!?! That would apply to this conversation about as much as all that other sh1t.

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$. Best of luck to you bro...

[anerlich]

No. First off, dead hand is not an insult, And of course good wrestlers are alive and flowing. I'm talking about point of contact and how it is controlled. Meaning Contact Control .

Dead hand in this situation refers to the condition where your hand is fully committed solely to holding on to it's point of contact on your opponent.

OK, I figured that was what you meant.

I don't accept that "live hand" is the sole province of WC, HFY or otherwise. Or that wrestlers can't do it and don't do it.

Frankly, I don't see the point of taking something like Contact Control (caps are yours, not mine), which is something fairly common to many MA styles, and treating it as something profound that the "uninitiated" can't grasp.

Same with "antigrappling" and "countergrappling". Just definitions for what a pure striker might do against a grappler, and what a grappler might do. Artificial and pointless distinction for someone who does both and is more concerned with effectiveness than semantics.

One of my frustrations with TCMA is that people latch onto fairly pedestrian concepts and inflate their importance to the point where they feel they should be inscribed on the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus ,and assume because their Sifu told it to them that no one else has heard of it, when it's often close to the bleeding obvious.

Yeah, good call to whoever brought Hendrik onto this thread and even better, allowing his spat with T to migrate here like cancer through the bloodstream of an afflicted patient.

[anerlich]

that post was ****ing hilarious!

I take it back. That post was worth putting up with both Hendrik and T.

T likes arguing so much, he's compelled to do it with himself as well as the rest.

[anerlich]

sure, dont you know my idol is Van Helsing? going after the Un dead needs lots of guts, taking risk, and hard work isnt it?

Just as well it's Undead, not Brain Dead, otherwise you'd be the hunted, not the hunter.

[Ultimatewingchun]

OK, I figured that was what you meant.

I don't accept that "live hand" is the sole province of WC, HFY or otherwise. Or that wrestlers can't do it and don't do it.

Frankly, I don't see the point of taking something like Contact Control (caps are yours, not mine), which is something fairly common to many MA styles, and treating it as something profound that the "uninitiated" can't grasp.

Same with "antigrappling" and "countergrappling". Just definitions for what a pure striker might do against a grappler, and what a grappler might do. Artificial and pointless distinction for someone who does both and is more concerned with effectiveness than semantics.

One of my frustrations with TCMA is that people latch onto fairly pedestrian concepts and inflate their importance to the point where they feel they should be inscribed on the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus ,and assume because their Sifu told it to them that no one else has heard of it, when it's often close to the bleeding obvious.

Yeah, good call to whoever brought Hendrik onto this thread and even better, allowing his spat with T to migrate here like cancer through the bloodstream of an afflicted patient.

***THIS THREAD has become hilarious. And the remark about the "Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus" just blew me away !!!

[t_niehoff]

I guess when your head is filled with theoretical nonsense, you can't really grasp simple things.

When you do chi sao you are grappling but it is not some "form of grappling." There isn't such a thing as a "form of grapplnig" anymore than there is a "form of striking". You are either grappling, striking, or combining them (when you hold and hit, for example). Yes, Virginia, chi sao is grappling.

And chi sao, the exercise/drill, isn't training you to fight, As it is an unrealistic drill/exercise - as it is not done under realistic conditions- you can't develop fighting skills by doing it. You can LEARN to perform actions (grappling with striking thrown in), but since your partner isn't fighting you, you can't learn how to do those actionsin fighting. You are only learning how to do them in chi sao. Yes, Virginia, chi sai is an unrealsitic exercise.

So, chi sao is grappling, but it is grappling performed in an unrealsitic, artifical way. Yes, Virginia, chi sao is both -- it is grappling and it is an artificial drill. How difficult is that to understand?

And this is precisely why I don't want to discuss things with the HFY cultmembers -- they are so brainwashed, so used to not thinking (in a rational way), so caught up in their fantasy, that they can't grasp the simplest of things.

[t_niehoff]

The context and the usage of the term in the manner that I'm referring to WAS at the time unique to HFY. As for anything you learned in 1993?? Big fricken deal. I have Sihings who learned HFY from my Sifu all the way back to 1977. Before TWC was even known in the USA.

People can claim anything. Too bad there isn't any evidence.

and you're on crack if you think you learned our forms.

I saw the HFY SNT at the VTM and I already knew it. When Garrett askedme what I thought of HFY I told him then that it looked like TWC with more theory.

Gu Lao punch?? Really??? Now that is funny.

Go look a true Gu Lao punch. And then feel free to come back here and re-edit your post. Because this is silliest thing you've written yet.

Well, Benny goes and studies with Robert, and learns the punch. He later writes an article talking about the "HFY punch". You say that the stuff in the article shows Robert took from HFY. I'm showing that it was the other way round -- Benny took it from Robert.

Sad for you that you consider this a pile of rubbish. Truly shows what an ignorant fool you are.

I'm sure the Scientologists feel the same way.

Yes, we've heard you say this a million times. Appears it is the ONLY thing you learned from Robert which is too bad.

That's not the only thing, but it may be the most important. But I can see why you don't like it: it is the bullsh1t filter.

more so-called wisdom from a poser.

You see, that's a personal attack. And I'm surprised you don't like wisdom from posers -- that seems to be all you listen to.

More hypocracy and back-peddling. I'm sure you'll re-edit your prior posts to conform to this last paragraph too.

No need to -- I'm sorry that your mind is so confused with theoretical nonsense that you can't follow simple reasoning.

What other great wisdom did you learn from sitting on the sidelines and not will touching anyone's hand??

Oh, this is an allusion to when I was at the VTM seminar. FWIW, I did participate in those parts that interested me (like Rene's and Marty's parts of the seminar). The one I opted out of was Benny teaching chi sao. There is nothing Benny could teach me.

Asfar as touching hands gfoes, I did chi sao with loads of people there (Jeglum, Rene, Dave, Dzu, etc.). In fact, Dave, Dzu, and I wereout of ont floor of the VTM until 2am training when wecaught Benny and his minions sneaking out to have a private lesson from Garrett. It was after that incident that I wouldn't play with Benny's guys anymore.

Truly sorry for re-joining this thread. Will leave if Terence is done talking smack.

Good. Then maybe next time you think twice.

[t_niehoff]

Terrence,

Who are you? Your nobody. You don’t know HFY. You sit in your little chair hiding behind your keyboard.

You want to test your skill? Come test it in Phoenix, you arrogant little sh1t!

Btw, why do you constantly edit your posts? You can’t keep your nutty thoughts straight? Or do you constantly change your mind because you don’t know what your talking about? The truth doesn’t change but your words do!

Yes, I don't know HFY. Just like I don't know Yellow Bamboo. Just like I don't know all kinds of silly things. You don't need to know something to recognize it is nonsense.

Oh, another deadly internet challenge. I guess that proves you're tough or that I'm somehow afraid to take the time,spend the money, etc.to travel thousands of miles to . . . .

Why do I keep editing my posts? Mainly to correct typing mistakes. I type fast and then send them off, and after rereading them notice that Ijoinedseveral words togeter (example). What do you care if I edit them?

You're right -- the truth doesn't change. But fantasy sure does,

Now, if you want to continue responding to me and have me continue to tell you why HFY is silly and nonsense, and how it is not legitimate WCK, etc. please, do go on. I'm more than happy to oblige.

[t_niehoff]

As far as Terrance goes, I don't really know you bro, but you are really off base with what you are talking about. There are alot of people out there who respect Sifu Garrett Gee as being one of the true practitioners of Wing Chun in the world. There are many in China who respect the man more than their own Sifus. On the other hand, your Sifu doesn't exactly have the best "street cred" if you know what I mean. I say this as a bystander, but one who has seen a few things. I know a blow hard when I see one. You sir, are the hardest blower I have seen in some time (not to mention all of your hypocracy). But hey, if you want to keep spouting insults from the yellow brick road with the rest of the munchkins, go right ahead. It's not my a$$. Best of luck to you bro...

I tell you what, why don't you prove that HFY existed prior to Garrett Gee. Show me a single HFY practitioner, show me Wang Ming, show me anyone that even knew of or heard of HFY prior to Garrett Gee. I'm waiting.

You can't do it. No one can. Because HFY didn't exist prior to Garrett Gee. He made it up.

Dude, I don't care about "reputations" among TCMAists. That proves diddly-squat. Most TCMA is fantasy fu. How did these people earn their reputations? Certainly not by fighting, not using their martial arts. Not by producing fighters. No, we have people like you who believe without any real, solid evidence the nonsense they hear.

[Wayfaring]

Sheesh. I leave a thread for a few days and look what you guys do to it. There's some interesting things to talk about here like the live/dead hands grappling stuff, and a whole lot other more related to a train wreck.

With the stand-up grappling topics we were discussing, the aim of stand up grappling is to restrict an opponent's movement in some fashion while not restricting your movement so you can move to a position of advantage, execute a technique like a takedown/submission, or strike. We can talk about "fully committed" attempts at this and "partially committed", live / dead hands but when it gets to the fighting application part of it the skill involved is still in isolating a particular part of your opponent's movement for the exact period of time necessary for you to move to a position of advantage, execute a technique, or strike. This involves technique, timing, range.

In BJJ and Judo they call this "grip fighting", maybe wrestling too. There are different approaches in Greco and freestyle as well. Muy Thai has a unique approach to this too. When you add in striking scenarios the hardest skill to develop is where to do the grappling so as to leave you striking options or a grappling position advantage or submission that removes your opponents striking options.

From what I've observed this is one area of the overall fight game where WC could contribute greatly. I mean couldn't we look at from one viewpoint the exercise of "chi sau" as training for one system of grip fighting?

These are the interesting things to me out of this thread to continue to discuss.

[Wayfaring]

You can't do it. No one can. Because HFY didn't exist prior to Garrett Gee. He made it up.

T,

One thing is for sure. HFY wasn't taught in the US prior to Garrett Gee teaching it. But just from logical rational thought, you don't develop that kind of high level of wing chun skill in application by making something up. Seminars are one thing and you don't like Benny Meng - sure.

I mean I think you can even ask your own wing chun teacher Robert what his perception of Sifu Gee's skills are if you don't want to have personal contact yourself. And Robert's learned from more than one source.

And on a side note, I think you'll have a good time interacting with JP. You'll find outside of arguing on the Internet he's a pretty level guy. No Moonie or anything. If you have any of your group sparring guys meeting maybe you could invite him. Or just spar a little or something no death matches.

Threads like this escalate and raise stakes in personal interaction so they don't occur. Or get blown out of proportion. All that is kind of silly.