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

[goju]

Sure, whatever. Keep working on your GED.

lol wow you actually ran out something to say?
now i KNOW i hit a nerve!

anyway im gonna go have breakfast

feel free to plot another nonsensical long winded retort while im gone old chap you have plenty of time

[Knifefighter]

Please explain the intended purpose and method of what you term non grappling within the context of the training tool of ChiSao...

Chi sao that seeks to avoid certain grappling aspects of that such as over-hooks, under-hooks, over/unders, body clinches, and the other natural results of being in that range is non-grappling.


Watch almost any MMA fight during close contact range. This is what real fighting looks like. A combination of grappling, clinching, striking, and fighting for position. This is what realistic training should mimic.

[Wayfaring]

Why does anyone need to refer to imaginary lines, triangles, etc. in the first place?

They are a concept that helps a person to be aware of the proper alignment of things within their own structure such as hip, knee, elbow as well as their alignment with respecct to an opponent.

These things are not unique to WC - they are also in BJJ. For example, in guard - 3 points of contact on an opponent = control. Less is not, which comes into play in more of your open guards. Centerline - moving an elbow across center, or moving your center so that an elbow is across center is the basis for setting up a series of attacks from guard. Sweeps - removing one of the triangle's 3 points removes the base and allows the completion of the sweep. I also use the fundamental principle of the triangle to check my base at times in unique transitionary positions. Where is my weight distribution w/r to the 3 points of the triangle that represents contact with the ground?

Concepts alone won't build skill. However, concepts are mental models that allow a person to check their fundamentals at different points to ensure that what they are building into muscle memory is fundamentally sound. A firm grasp of fundamental concepts can help you to apply them when a scenario is out of the ordinary.

This speaks to triangles and lines, but also to the overall idea of concepts and theory in skill development.

They won't work alone - need to be applied in a live environment, but if they are they are tested in this fashion they represent a way that cognitive human beings can advance their skill beyond what is available by just learning by feel or touch.

[SAAMAG]

Funny, people keep throwing around the term "real fighting" and this is what it should look like, etc. REAL fighting has more to do with the intent of the fight than the pressure being exerted. Are the participants of the fighting intending to do real harm? Is there malicious intent? That's where the "REAL" comes from.

What you see in the REAL fight will vary between participants. When you're in close and see your two MMA guys fighting for position, clinching, punching, and so forth--you're seeing two guys who are trained in doing those types of movements, e.g. wrestling/MT clinches, inside boxing, and etc. Its real when they both are intending to put the other guy out in order to win. If you take two wing chun guys and put them in the same situation (i.e. a match where they're both of the same intent) then that same scenario more than likely wouldn't be as prevalant. Same goes for a karate guy and a boxer. You're not going to see the same things occurring--though its still a REAL fight.

Skills play a role of course, but skills aside--it comes down to what you're familiar with and what you're presented with.

[Knifefighter]

What you see in the REAL fight will vary between participants. When you're in close and see your two MMA guys fighting for position, clinching, punching, and so forth--you're seeing two guys who are trained in doing those types of movements, e.g. wrestling/MT clinches, inside boxing, and etc. Its real when they both are intending to put the other guy out in order to win. If you take two wing chun guys and put them in the same situation (i.e. a match where they're both of the same intent) then that same scenario more than likely wouldn't be as prevalant. Same goes for a karate guy and a boxer. You're not going to see the same things occurring--though its still a REAL fight.

The reason you see two MMA guys fighting for position, clinching, punching, etc is because those are the things that are most effective for fighting. They have to use them to win.

Take the WC/karate/boxer guy from your example above and put him into a situation where he is going against someone who is skilled at fighting for position, clinching, punching, etc and the WC/karate/boxer will be at a severe disadvantage. The one dimensional fighter almost always loses. That has been shown thousands of time over the years.

[SAAMAG]

The reason you see two MMA guys fighting for position, clinching, punching, etc is because those are the things that are most effective for fighting. They have to use them to win.

Take the WC/karate/boxer guy from your example above and put him into a situation where he is going against someone who is skilled at fighting for position, clinching, punching, etc and the WC/karate/boxer will be at a severe disadvantage. The one dimensional fighter almost always loses. That has been shown thousands of time over the years.

What I mean Dale, is that skill level aside -- what you see will be different based on training. When you bring in skill levels, then obviously the higher skilled person will be the victor.

[JPinAZ]

No, just basic. And something you didn't mention.

Yeah, I didn't mention a bunch of things that are basic. BFD. I could post a whole thread on just basics, and a lot of it would still go over your head. See my signature for proof
What is funny, this line of discussion all started because your sifu thought that the basics such as punching with the whole body are oh so rare these days, when they really aren't.

Bringing up this old fish story again? Let's see -- you weren't there, don't know what you're talking about, etc. So this is how you rebut my POV? Brilliant.

I was just talking about basics. Some people have them, and some have to steal them and pawn them off as their own.
So, even while you weren't there, you're saying he didn't take the info for his 5 stages/phases of combat article off a white board at another school, ask for a piece of paper and a pen, write it all down in front of a bunch of people and then later pass it off as his own ideas in an article without any credit back to its source?

And, yes, self-appointed titles are silly.

Yeah, so who appointed your sifu to "GM" then?
And, BTW, you've said all titles of master and grandmaster in MAs are silly...

Hey, and why are you replying directly to a post of mine anyway when it wasn't directed toward you? What happened to all that crying and whining you've done so many times about "wah wah wah, well, don't reply to my posts, and I won't..." and "I want nothing to do with you ___ guys, you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone, wah wah wah". Guess you have no problem replying to someone you have no interest in having conversations with. You're such a hypocrite

[TenTigers]

Chi sao that seeks to avoid certain grappling aspects of that such as over-hooks, under-hooks, over/unders, body clinches, and the other natural results of being in that range is non-grappling.


Watch almost any MMA fight during close contact range. This is what real fighting looks like. A combination of grappling, clinching, striking, and fighting for position. This is what realistic training should mimic.

so Dale, would you reccommend a form of chi-sao that combined chi-sao with pummelling?

[SAAMAG]

so Dale, would you reccommend a form of chi-sao that combined chi-sao with pummelling?

You know I always thought it was weird that swimming for underhooks was called pummeling since the definition of pummel is to hit with the fists or hands, which would mean that technically chi sao already contains pummeling.

[Knifefighter]

so Dale, would you reccommend a form of chi-sao that combined chi-sao with pummelling?

I would recommend a form of chi sao that combined chi sao with all the elements that might occur there.

[SAAMAG]

I would recommend a form of chi sao that combined chi sao with all the elements that might occur there.

Then that would be clinch sparring. Not chi sao.

[TenTigers]

You know I always thought it was weird that swimming for underhooks was called pummeling since the definition of pummel is to hit with the fists or hands, which would mean that technically chi sao already contains pummeling.

yeah, I found that funny too. For awhile, before I learned what it was, I thought MMA fighters were saying that they were doing hammerfists, or something.
I like the term,"Swimming" better. It is a more apt description.

[Knifefighter]

Then that would be clinch sparring. Not chi sao.

Then it would be a more effective training method... imagine that.

[TenTigers]

Then that would be clinch sparring. Not chi sao.

I guess it depends on how it is played. If the two partners are doing it to develop sensitivity/reaction/position/root, then it could be called a type of chi-sao.
I have seen many different versions of freestyle tui-sao, all very different than classical tui-sao, yet all developing the specific qualities, so it was accepted to be called tui-sao.
In Hung Kuen, we say,"Kiu-sau," which encompasses everything from chi-sao,tui-sao type exercises, to sam-sing, and gripping exercises.
"It's just a name. Don't make a fuss about it."

[Ultimatewingchun]

Man how long have you been studying WC for, because i am calling you out as a phony if you say you have studied for more than 1 month of WC.

Chi Sao is not grappling nor is it fighting simulation. Who ever agrees with this needs to go back and listen to there sifu better or get a new one.

Chi Sao develops contact relexes, eye coordination, footwork and most importantly chi. Which school teaches that Chi sao is grappling??? If your holding onto the arm, then your not doing Chi sao exercises properly.

Chi Sao = when i feel him do this, i will do this (sometimes when i see this, must do this), whether it be full step back, bil sao, jut sao, lop sao and pull down if he goes to kick, etc. Chi is supposed to be developed by the forward force you and your partner generate when going through the basic motion of two arm chi sao.

Chi sao described as grappling??? If you are referring to lop sao on someones arm and punching them in the head and not letting go, well thats what newbies do, because they think its fighting. Once you have put overwhelming pressure on your opponent, you should stop and start the two arm drill again.

***That's a good post, Niersun.