WCK is attached fighting

[t_niehoff]

Yes, of course it is....

As evidenced by your inability to point to something that wasn't consistent.

To most, "Clinching" refers to "The Clinch" which most take to mean locking up with your opponent in a clinch... VT does not trap its own hands..... PERIOD!

No, that's how YOU look at it. Chi sao IS a clinch (or more accurately, a representation of one).

VT does not lock up, nor does it clinch in the conventional sense of the term....

VT does remove obstructions, it can jam it can grab but no not clinch in the conventional sense.. All one needs to do to see that is look at the tools and moves in the forms.. VT is about CHANGE and changing momentary controls that are linked.. Change is VT!

It's easy to confuse terms in print.. What one person thinks "attach" means, what one person thinks "clinch" means may not be what others think..

Just more assertions . . . .

WCK has a method, and that method comes to us from the ancestors. I didn't make it up. The movements in the forms are ALL bridge hands -- get it, BRIDGE hands. BRIDGE. Contact. Attached.

Here's what VT is not:

Yes, those are wrestlers.

VT is about landing powerful strikes to destroy and disrupt.. Extended, yet momentary "contact" is used when needed, e.g. IF they are in (or come back into) our space preventing the former.. When they are not in that space then reaching for a limb is not what VT is about.. Reaching for a limb that is leaving the line is a major "faux pas" in this art no matter what you call it. Yes, VT controls but how it controls and which tools are used are dependent on what the opponent does and in no case does any of it involve "the clinch".

I am not talking about "reaching for a limb" or reaching for anything. You join by striking -- as the kuit tells us "see form, strike form, . . ." and "hand goes out does not come back. . ."

The Faat also does not refer to VT "clinching" either.. If you think it does, then your interpretation of the faat is, well, odd.. There is no clear intent in the faat of VT "Clinching"....

The first method of the faat is daap, ride or join. In other words, make and keep contact. Or, as the kuit tells us, "if there is no bridge, create one . . ."

VT's Preferred range is the range at which you can strike your opponent with both arms and legs without taking a step...

WCK's preferred range is where I can control my opponent while striking him.

T you fail to address any specifics of how you apply your method and you refuse to post any video of your supposed "unique" interpretation... IMO this is simply because you know that if seen no one would be buying any of it...as VT.. Or, maybe you are using the art just as some here advocate, but, we'll never know because you won't show, or tell..

I'll be happy to show you -- just come visit me. I went across the country numerous times, paid a lot of money, put in loads of hard work, etc. to learn. So, if you want to learn, make an effort.

[YungChun]

Exactly. Look, why have as our signature drills/exercise one that is attached (in contact) to then not fight in contact? That doesn't make good sense.

Because those drills are training you, not, how to remain attached but rather how to nullify the attachment....in order to strike...

Doesn't it make sense that you want to practice in contact so that you can fight in contact? And, in fact, everything in WCK points that way -- if you open your eyes to it.

It makes sense to study contact in order to deal with contact... Where "deal with" means to train to nullify the attempted attachment (control) of us..in order to attack..

At times this can mean that we are training to nullify their control with our own control and attacking actions.. But not always.. At times this can simply mean to let their error go (leave) and maintain the *pressure* of the actual striking/blasting attack..

The key is to know when you need additional control and when you don't, and it depends on the actions of the opponent, and if they are hindering (obstructing the line) or helping (leaving the line) our ability to release our attacks..

Moreover, there are the leg moves that no one addresses to assist the hands, and aid in control..

[YungChun]

No, that's how YOU look at it. Chi sao IS a clinch (or more accurately, a representation of one).

VT does not clinch using the accepted meaning of that term...

I didn't make it up. The movements in the forms are ALL bridge hands -- get it, BRIDGE hands. BRIDGE. Contact. Attached.

I agree... But in the past what you mean by "attached" has at times read as hand chasing and "clinching" by the accepted definition meaning to lock up and/or trap your own hands.. IF this is not your meaning then there is no issue.

I am not talking about "reaching for a limb" or reaching for anything. You join by striking -- as the kuit tells us "see form, strike form, . . ." and "hand goes out does not come back. . ."

Agreed... In so much as I can glean from these short comments...

The first method of the faat is daap, ride or join. In other words, make and keep contact. Or, as the kuit tells us, "if there is no bridge, create one . . ."

Agreed there is a time to stick but rarely a time to keep the hand attached in a fixed and static manner.. As I said, VT based on the faat is about change...

[YungChun]

Just wanted to emphasize this point..

I am not talking about "reaching for a limb" or reaching for anything. You join by striking

This is really what many are saying...and would seem to me to answer the question of what comes first, what is priority in VT...


You join by striking..

So the "onus" is on them...(to get in our way)

We are striking...not reaching for a limb (chasing hands), we are not seeking to trap.... This is exactly what is meant by that...

[t_niehoff]

Just wanted to emphasize this point..

--

This is really what many are saying...and would seem to me to answer the question of what comes first, what is priority in VT...


You join by striking..

So the "onus" is on them...(to get in our way)

We are striking...not reaching for a limb (chasing hands), we are not seeking to trap.... This is exactly what is meant by that...

You still don't get it. What we want to do is get an attachment as we break his structure (to daap, jeet, and chum all in one action -- that's the ideal). For example, my pak sao is a strike -- not to his arm, not to open lines, not to remove obstructions, but to join (give me an attachment, a handle) and break his structure with the same action. In other words, to control while strikiing. And from there, I stay attached while I continue to control while striking.

[YungChun]

You still don't get it.

First of all.. No blanket statements..

What in that post do you disagree with?

[t_niehoff]

VT does not clinch using the accepted meaning of that term...

The accepted meaning of clinch is to be is sustained contact with an opponent while standing. There are many ways to clinch. Judo is clinch, Greco is clinch. Dirty boxing is clinch. And WCK is a form of dirty boxing.

I agree... But in the past what you mean by "attached" has at times read as hand chasing and "clinching" by the accepted definition meaning to lock up and/or trap your own hands.. IF this is not your meaning then there is no issue.

You read into it things I do not say. A bridge is a solid connection to your opponent -- I have bridge hands when my arms/hands have a solid connection to my opponent. Why do I want a solid connection? To control him (since you can't control without one).

As far as "lock up and/or your own hands", this is your own private "concept".

Application tells me what to do, not silly "concepts".

Agreed... In so much as I can glean from these short comments...

These "short comments" are akin to "hit the ball" -- if you are playing the game, you get it, if you aren't playing the game, you won't.

Agreed there is a time to stick but rarely a time to keep the hand attached in a fixed and static manner.. As I said, VT based on the faat is about change...

No. No. No. The WCK faat isn't about "change", it is a strategic approach to fighting. Look, ground and pound is a strategic approach to fighting. You can break that approach down into strategic steps -- get in and clinch, take him down, get dominant position, maintain dominant position, deliver your weapons. It's the same with WCK, the faat gives you a break down into strategic steps of the WCK method of fighting, daap, jeet, chum, biu, chi. That's what we are trying to do when we fight. It's our game plan. Our tools are means of implementing that plan. Just like a GNPer needs some skills to clinch and take down, we need stills to daap and jeet, to join and close the opponent's down.

[HumbleWCGuy]

It sounds to me like you guys just like to go out and throw punches and hope that someone wants to play wing chun with you. WC trapping is offensive, defense, and counter. You choose the method that fits you best based on your attributes. It sounds to me like you guys think that countering and defense amounts to chasing hands. This certainly would explain why Terrence has so much trouble comprehending Victor's sparring session. If you train Chi Sao 24/7 then you never develop the timing for the defensive and counter aspects of trapping.

[m1k3]

OK, what about clinching is trapping your own hands? A clinch is not a static position but a dynamic fight for control to gain the dominate position. The person with the dominate position is the one who can strike, knee, throw, takedown or disengage.

I just don't buy that clinch fighting is trapping your own hands.

[t_niehoff]

First of all.. No blanket statements..

What in that post do you disagree with?

What you seem to keep saying is like saying that the whole point of ground and pound is to hit. But that misses the whole point -- it is a strategy or game that permits us to control while striking, not just hit. GNP is not just hitting.

And it is the same with WCK, which is similar to standing GNP. WCK has a method to permit us to control while striking, not just to hit.

[YungChun]

It sounds to me like you guys just like to go out and throw punches and hope that someone wants to play wing chun with you. WC trapping is offensive, defense, and counter. You choose the method that fits you best based on your attributes. It sounds to me like you guys think that countering and defense amounts to chasing hands. This certainly would explain why Terrence has so much trouble comprehending Victor's sparring session. If you train Chi Sao 24/7 then you never develop the timing for the defensive and counter aspects of trapping.

Outside use of entry traps is:

1.. Something Victor (and most of us) already said is unlikely against a good boxer/fighter..

2.. Not something Victor did in the clip..

3.. The lower % aspects of VT..against good fighters..

ChiSao is not generally known for training outside fighting...although I agree some attributes can crossover.

[t_niehoff]

It sounds to me like you guys just like to go out and throw punches and hope that someone wants to play wing chun with you. WC trapping is offensive, defense, and counter. You choose the method that fits you best based on your attributes. It sounds to me like you guys think that countering and defense amounts to chasing hands. This certainly would explain why Terrence has so much trouble comprehending Victor's sparring session. If you train Chi Sao 24/7 then you never develop the timing for the defensive and counter aspects of trapping.

It sounds to me like you haven't learned WCK.

There is no such thing as trapping -- WCK doesn't trap. Trapping is NOT a WCK term. It is a JKD term.

[YungChun]

What you seem to keep saying is like saying that the whole point of ground and pound is to hit. But that misses the whole point -- it is a strategy or game that permits us to control while striking, not just hit. GNP is not just hitting.

And it is the same with WCK, which is similar to standing GNP. WCK has a method to permit us to control while striking, not just to hit.

Set your phaser to a narrow beam...

Let's first just address that post please.. It clearly addresses the initial bridge to the opponent.. I would like to be clear if we agree on this point or not..

For example, my pak sao is a strike -- not to his arm {snip}

What is your pak aiming at?

[HumbleWCGuy]

It sounds to me like you haven't learned WCK.

There is no such thing as trapping -- WCK doesn't trap. Trapping is NOT a WCK term. It is a JKD term.

That's interesting because I was just thinking that what your conception of WC is limited to a couple JKD trapping movements. Your comments indicate that what you got from Robert was, JKD trapping, chi sao, a bunch of fantasy fighting advice, and some information on Chinese culture. The fact that you spend all of your time trying to supplement your WC with other arts on one hand and tell us about how to practice TWC properly on the other is really all that needs to be said. If you were not suffering from the psychological phenomenon of commitment and consistency on the most delusional level then you would not practice WC at all.

[t_niehoff]

Set your phaser to a narrow beam...

Let's first just address that post please.. It clearly addresses the initial bridge to the opponent.. I would like to be clear if we agree on this point or not..

Yes, but you need to look how that fits into the whole game plan.

What is your pak aiming at?

I'll take baby steps.

Let's say my opponent's arms are between us. I am not going to try and just hit him in the head through his arm (since he can hit me too), so I will hit his arms (daap) -- in this way, I stop his ability to hit me (jeet). But, my hit is to break (chum) his structure via his arms.

For example, look at Phils' clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTOZ2iQbiL4 that's not bad and it's similar to something we do, but he is not hitting the opponent with his body structure through the bong sao. If he hit with the bong sao, he would drive his bong sao, like a punch, into his opponent's arms, trying to drive it into the body of his opponent (and if the opponent dropped his arms, he'd just get hit with an elbow). See form, hit form. Ideally, the strike will break his opponent's body structure. That's dap, jeet, chum all in one action. And it's not WCK kickboxing. It's all WCK movement, implementing the WCK faat (game plan).

Once I'm in contact, I stay in contact, trying to control my opponent while I strike him.