Sooo...perhaps boxing and wing chun aren't so different after all?

[goju]

I'm still waiting for the answer to MY question. Please provide some evidence for WC (or ANY method, for that matter) that is able to consistently use elbows as the main striking object in full contact fights.

you mean to tell me you guys arent bff anymore!

[Frost]

The keysi guys?

lol got to love those guys..... i know the grappling coach they approached to show them how to grapple and fight on the ground when they were actually thinking about doing some MMA fighting

[Knifefighter]

The keysi guys?

1- I don't think they claim to use elbows as the primary weapons, although they do claim to use them.

2- I don't think there is any evidence of them actually training full contact using primarily elbows.

3- Personally, having done a lot of elbow striking over the years, I believe anyone who claims they use elbows as the major part of their standing striking has not really tested their theory out in full contact situations.

4- Anyone who actually could use elbows effectively as a primary weapon in standing striking situations could completely revolutionize the sport of MMA.

5- The evidence points to the use of elbows as being a relatively small subset of useful striking surfaces. The elbow is a devastating weapon, but it is limited due to its range capabilities, and the problems associated with being able to bring it into play in standing striking situations.

[sanjuro_ronin]

1- I don't think they claim to use elbows as the primary weapons, although they do claim to use them.

2- I don't think there is any evidence of them actually training full contact using primarily elbows.

3- Personally, having done a lot of elbow striking over the years, I believe anyone who claims they use elbows as the major part of their standing striking has not really tested their theory out in full contact situations.

4- Anyone who actually could use elbows effectively as a primary weapon in standing striking situations could completely revolutionize the sport of MMA.

5- The evidence points to the use of elbows as being a relatively small subset of useful striking surfaces. The elbow is a devastating weapon, but it is limited due to its range capabilities, and the problems associated with being able to bring it into play in standing striking situations.

Oh, I agree.
elbows are great "weapons of occasion" but looking to use them as a primary weapon is not a good way to go about it.

[m1k3]

Look at the WEC Uriah Faber fight with I think Mike Brown where he messed up his hand early in the fight and tried to use elbows as a primary striking weapon. It wasn't very successful.

[wkmark]

WCK is a combination art, it is grappling and striking.



Both may use the fist, but the fist isn't WCK's primary weapon (WCK makes much more use of the elbow than the fist).

Could you clarify this a bit more? I am not sure I understand this fully.

[goju]

when melchor menchor fought danny steel he used a a ton of elbows through the fight

he didnt throw them like most people do though he popped them out like a jab

cut danny up and won the match too

[SAAMAG]

There are very little similar tools.

Do you think training in boxing will help you play chi sao? Why or why not?

Again, missing the point. And you complain about others having a 3rd grade reading level?

Re-read not only the post you replied to but also the first part of the original post. Were not talking about adding boxing, were discussing the notion that it's not necessary in unattached fighting with regard to wing chun.

[t_niehoff]

I'm calling bullsh!t on this. Please post the video of you doing this (or anyone, for that matter) in a full contact situation.

Look at anyone fighting (with striking involved) in a clinch -- attached fighting. MT is a good example. Yes, fist strikes are involved, but the more significant hand weapon is the elbow (causes more damage to opponent, less possible injury to you, greater leverage in close, etc.). Isn't the elbow what causes the most deaths in the ring in MT?

Consider the WCK forms for a moment-- how many punches? How many elbows? Why so many elbows and so few punches? The forms are trying to tell you something (here are the tools you'll need). If the punch was the main weapon why is it so under-represented? Why is the elbow so over-represented?

[HumbleWCGuy]

Terrence is correct on this one. TWC is a weird combination of of classical MT-style hands and savate-style kicking.

[m1k3]

Terrence is correct on this one across the board.

WORLD TO END TODAY! DETAILS AT 11pm!!!

[t_niehoff]

Again, missing the point. And you complain about others having a 3rd grade reading level?

Re-read not only the post you replied to but also the first part of the original post. Were not talking about adding boxing, were discussing the notion that it's not necessary in unattached fighting with regard to wing chun.

Answer my question -- will boxing help you play chi sao? Why or why not?

I'll help you. It won't. Why? Because boxing movement isn't for attached fighting. You can't use boxing movement to do all the things you need to do when attached.

Now, I know chi sao isn't attached fighting, but it is a drill to practice attached skills.

What do you need to play chi sao? WCK movement (tan, bong, fook, the WCK punch, etc.) -- things that are "designed" to work while attached. This is why we practice them while attached. It makes absolutely nonsense to practice things attached to then do them while unattached.

Skills that work very well while attached, don't work so well when unattached; just like skills for detached fighting don't work very well for attached fighting.

[sanjuro_ronin]

when melchor menchor fought danny steel he used a a ton of elbows through the fight

he didnt throw them like most people do though he popped them out like a jab

cut danny up and won the match too

I don't think he used them as his primary weapon, but he did use them very well.

[JPinAZ]

tell me if i got this right. You read some words off a board. Didn't ask what they mean and have written articles and make generalizations. Is that what you call research. Damm you would be shot in a uni. You tend to try to make yourself come off as knowing all vt. Is this like you twc and wsl knowledge. As in you went to a few seminars. Who have you actually learnt off properly. As studied full time until finished not just a few lessons and try to get stuff you don't know. You mention yks alot. Did you study that properly. I have read yous cool and several articles and i always had the impression you had properly studied under all there systems. Is this true.

You got it exactly right. This is the problem with this guy, he hasn't studied in-depth (if at all) in neither HFY or TWC, yet he thinks he is such the WC expert he can pass judgement on both - many times. It seems you might be wondering about his qualifications to do this? me too! Well, he isn't qualified! He hasn't done the research, yet he'd want everyone to believe so. Maybe he should just stick to what he does know and stop admittedly 'making it up' about things he doesn't!

IMO, a problem with this guy is his rumor milling and gossip, and well frankly, sh!t talking that's been going on for years. He and his students talk of who stole from whom, who's lying, etc while he himself is the one that's been dishonest. They repeatedly accused TWC and HFY top members for being dishonest and either making stuff up, or copying from one or the other. This same sh!t talking has been going on for years - Who the f*ck is he?
Another example is how he said in front of over 30 eye witnesses how GM Chueng made up TWC. I've have video of him saying worse things about GM Chueng. Again, more rumors and gossip. It goes on and on

Regarding what he's actually learned, I'm sure he's learned some WC thru all this time, but how many sifus has this character gone thru and burned bridges with? One of them he went to, after burning the last bridge, told him that if he (robert) wanted to learn, he'd have to start over because he's so green. So in a huff, he Robert left yet again another sifu. I guess robert always knows better than even his sifu

No wonder this guy admittedly 'makes it up'. He made up his own interpretations of direct HFY concepts and terms he admittedly copied for an article he wrote directly about them because he admittedly didn't understand a bit of it! (after over 10 years of avoiding the question) Why not jsut STFU if he doesn't know? Or actually spend the time to learn them! But then he tries coming here and pawning off that 'YKS always had that too'. Here: "YKS WCK's first 5 keywords sum up everything in WCK: Dop (Attach), Jeet (Intercept), Chum Sink), Biu (Dart/Rush In), Chi (Stick). I learned that decades ago, not from some blackboard in GG's garage. " and then "If you think about it - YKS WCK's keyords are describing, Bai Jong, Jeet Kiu, Chum Kiu, Juie Ying, and Wui Ma"
Yeah? Then why copy HFY terms and write about them if YKS already had the same thing? And those 5 YKS terms aren't even CLOSE to the same as the HFY terms and concepts he 'borrowed' for his article. See how he twists things to discredit others and qualify himself look like the expert?

He's here today and says things are in the past, but he's been cutting others down, and pretty much calling people liars and thieves for years. More sh!t talking. And it's still going on, even in this very thread if anyone knows how to read! He (and his student) are still making insinuations regarding HFY and TWC. He says he doesn't conrtol his student, but it's the same exact story just from different mouths.
Example: "it is clear that HFY and TWC are closely related, yet organized differently. But again, we have no definite answer regarding the history" but then follows with "but I'm not interested in that" - yeah, but he still brings it up! What's clear is his not-so-subtle insinuation that they differ by organization alone and still questions their history.. Do the research brotha, or shut it!

Another example: "GG's blackboard had interesting Chinese terms for what I would describe as TWC's 5 concepts. That's all I took, terms in Chinese, which I felt was unexplained as TWC's." . Or how everything looks the same to him, and he wants to know why because he's a researcher. And then directly following it by admitting he didn't study any HFY! That started over 10 **** years ago! Did he do any further 'research'? Nope. But he sure can pass judgment real quick huh. Again, he isn't even qualified to talk about either!! I wonder about YKS too..

HE'S the one lumping both together in this thread, just as he's been doing the same sh!t every year since he's gotten a 'glimpse' of both so long ago. (I could go back just about every year and pull up examples, but I don't have time or energy). He calls it 'his opinion', but it's clear that 'his opinion' isn't based on anything more than a glimpse or any facts, just guesses. Some 'researcher'

In his post to me, he wanted me to call him or meet him so we can deal with it 'like me'. Yeah? How did that go when my sifu Richard Lowenhagen, Sifu Benny Meng, and GM Gee all came to LA to meet with him face to face 'like men' about some of these very issues. They even stayed in a hotel he had his student pick out for them, so he knew they were coming. But in 3 days, he never showed. All he had was excuse after excuse. And he wants to talk about meeting 'like men'.
What about when Randy Williams wanted to 'meet' with him after he was once-again sh!t talking about his sifu.. It goes on and on.

I'm done with this. He talks about making peace, IMO, he could start apologizing publicly. Until then, I don't want to hear anything more from this character

[Knifefighter]

Look at anyone fighting (with striking involved) in a clinch -- attached fighting. MT is a good example. Yes, fist strikes are involved, but the more significant hand weapon is the elbow (causes more damage to opponent, less possible injury to you, greater leverage in close, etc.).

MT's clinch/control techniques are nothing like WC's. MT has an efficient delivery system for striking with elbows, WC does not. Even then, elbows play a relatively minor role in terms of number of times strikes are actually landed with them in MT fights.

Consider the WCK forms for a moment-- how many punches? How many elbows? Why so many elbows and so few punches? The forms are trying to tell you something (here are the tools you'll need). If the punch was the main weapon why is it so under-represented? Why is the elbow so over-represented?

WC forms are theoretical nonsense and have almost nothing to do with fighting. All you have to do is look at them from a functional standpoint to see how far from actual fighting movements they are.

But, please feel free to prove me wrong. Go ahead post a clip of you (or anyone) using WC to efficiently deliver elbows from a WC delivery system.