Erik Paulson, wing chun, and the clinch

[lkfmdc]

The closer a drill is to how it is actually used in practice, the better that drill is

Don't remember a simple thread were the basic question was asked "why couldn't wing chun be done more like it is used in real fighting"?

Man, that turned into a crap storm in like 3 posts, and sh-it poured from the sky, cats and dogs lived together, real fire and brimestone sort of stuff, biblical!

[Knifefighter]

I understand what you're getting at, but not all drills (where the intent is to build an attribute) are going to look like fighting. Because they're not fighting drills they're attribute building drills.

LOL... and what attribute is being trained with those slappy little backfist thingees that everyone throws out all over the place when doing chi sao

[SAAMAG]

LOL... and what attribute is being trained with those slappy little backfist thingees that everyone throws out all over the place when doing chi sao

You can practice chi sao without doing any slappy backhand thingies. In fact I never use backfists as power shots. The chops you see are rarely done with any support and should be done moreso with the whole arm.

If it doesn't provide enough power to do damage enough to dissuade the person from staying where they're at then it's useless. I dropped backfists as a power move a long time ago. It's in the same tool box now as my jab.

[Ultimatewingchun]

LOL... Eric is demonstrating exactly what I've been saying here forever. Chi sao, when done realistically, is going to be no different than clinch fighting. Watch that clip without the sound and you would never know when he was talking about chi sao.

Compare what you saw in that clip with what you see 99% of WC people doing when they are doing chi sao and they look completely different.

Notice how you didn't see one of those slappy little backfists to the face, throat, and trunk area that you see all over the place when you see two guys doing chi sao.

If anything, what Eric showed there supports T's assertions about attached fighting.

***This is just pure rubbish. You, yourself destroyed Niehoff's assertions about using wing chun during "attached" mode (ie.- his amateur hour statements about using tan sao to get out of a MT plum - and his totally clueless claim that elbow strikes are wing chun's primary weapon)...

and now you say that he knows what he's talking about?! Rubbish.

You see, Dale, your lack of wing chun knowledge at anything more than a rudimentary level becomes more and more apparent with each of your posts.

When Erik Paulson shows the wider width of the rolling motion - he rightly puts his finger on the fact that at that distance away from the opponent - if you're not going to strike - then you have to account for the opponent's ability to come around your arms/elbows when they're held close to your centerline and ribs...

by widening the horizontal distance (expanding the width) between your arms...

so for example, in long arm chi sao, when the arms are further extended because you're further away from the opponent - you would look very similar to what Erik does when he...................
starts to come in for the double bicep ties and refers to them as use of the wing chun fuk sao and the chi sao rolling motion.

Furthermore, the fact that Erik only works in this vid with going from some wing chun blocks, parries, and redirects (pak, bil, huen) to clinch, and some chi sao rolling motion to a fuk sao-like bicep tie...

and didn't include punching, palm strikes, and some use of block-and-strike...

doesn't mean that these aspects of wing chun can't be done against a skilled, resisting opponent. It simply means that he chose not to deal with any of that.

His focus in this vid was on something else.

Do you recall any posts of mine from previous threads (say about a year or two ago) wherein I wrote about punching at the opponent's shoulder lines?

Now compare that idea with Erik's idea (and what he actually demos) about using his left arm to bridge into his opponent's right arm/shoulder/bicep area...and his right arm doing the same against the opponent's left...

and see how this squares with the wing chun concepts about virtually always using two arms at the same time - as in some version of simultaneous (or near simultaneous) attack and defense.

Think about it.

And btw, Dale, you're right about the hip pumping and pidgeon-toed stances - as they have no place in what Erik is getting at on that vid.

[shawchemical]

Also notice the "structure" when someone is working that range where there are tie ups and the possibility of being taken down... no pelvis tilting, no keeping the head up, no hip pumping, no pigeon toes, etc.

The structure you see there is what you need to be effective.

You're an utter moron.

totally clueless.

[Frost]

After all the dozens of pages and hundreds of posts talking about nonsense - concerning the uses or non-uses of wing chun in the clinch...

such as defending against the MT plum neck tie w/knee strikes....and all the bogus claims about how to use tan sao as a defense vs. the MT plum...

and all we heard about the proper use of MT plum...and how this or that way to defend is high percentage, low percentage, bogus percentage...

and how wing chun as "attached" fighting (which presumably means fighting in some sort of clinch) suggests that the primary wing chun weapon is elbow strikes....

and how that was debunked...and so on...

and exactly one person has replied to what a really high level former mma fighter has to say (and show) about clinch fighting...

wherein he talks of (and shows) uses of the wing chun pak sao, bil sao, huen sao, and fuk sao - and possible uses of chi sao training in mma fighting...

ONE PERSON !!!???






Jeez...maybe it's time to take up golf.

Well I was not replying because I really didn't see anything to reply about. It looked to me like he was tailoring his training to his audience, he was trying to explain the clinch in terms a wing chun audience would understand. I saw the usual things I have seen MMA coaches teach I didn't really see anything wingchun like to be honest, but as Mr Ross said it really is in the eye of the beholder I saw basic grappling being explained to a non grappling audience

[YungChun]

LOL... and what attribute is being trained with those slappy little backfist thingees that everyone throws out all over the place when doing chi sao

The Chop is not supposed to be a major part of ChiSao.. The actual technical place for the Chop is as FanSao.. Relying on the chopping and other "cheats" ends up making for poor ChiSao, which will translate even less to application.

The techniques in ChiSao are the techniques of VT.. Some of them are not going to be used at all or often in a given fight because which techniques are used is dependent on the conditions (energy/position) during an encounter.

There are also a myriad of other things learned in good ChiSao, kinesthetic awareness, balance manipulation, power/energy management and generating power, how to release it, core VT tactics, like following, facing, the core of what is in the kuit, etc.. All of these things are valid and vital to what is VT..none of which has anything to do with "clinching"..

ChiSao is not about the clinch per se, it is about the clash before the clinch and issuing an unbroken line of power..

Once you clinch or are on the ground dealing with a grappler you need grappling experience...or a lot of luck.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Well I was not replying because I really didn't see anything to reply about. It looked to me like he was tailoring his training to his audience, he was trying to explain the clinch in terms a wing chun audience would understand. I saw the usual things I have seen MMA coaches teach I didn't really see anything wingchun like to be honest, but as Mr Ross said it really is in the eye of the beholder I saw basic grappling being explained to a non grappling audience

***I don't disagree that Erik was showing wrestling/grappling to a non w/g audience - and using wing chun terminolgy since these were wc people.

But I also saw someone with a pretty darn good understanding of how and when to use things like pak sao, bil sao, huen sao, and fuk sao in real time application...as well as an understanding of what the difference is between regular chi sao and long arm chi sao....

and was using those things as entries into good solid wrestling/grappling clinch work and takedowns.

And he also demonstrates a real good understanding of wing chun central line theory and the use of two hands/arms simultaneously at close range.

Now the fact that these things "look" like other arts in some ways can be interpreted this way: effective fighting styles will all have a bunch of things in common...while at the same time bringing some fairly unique "pieces" of the puzzle to the table...

and then in time everyone gets to share in the communal dinner, so to speak.

And as I've been trying to say on this forum for a good 7-8 years now...wing chun does have something to offer at this mma feast.

[Frost]

***I don't disagree that Erik was showing wrestling/grappling to a non w/g audience - and using wing chun terminolgy since these were wc people.

But I also saw someone with a pretty darn good understanding of how and when to use things like pak sao, bil sao, huen sao, and fuk sao in real time application...as well as an understanding of what the difference is between regular chi sao and long arm chi sao....

and was using those things as entries into good solid wrestling/grappling clinch work and takedowns.

And he also demonstrates a real good understanding of wing chun central line theory and the use of two hands/arms simultaneously at close range.

Now the fact that these things "look" like other arts in some ways can be interpreted this way: effective fighting styles will all have a bunch of things in common...while at the same time bringing some fairly unique "pieces" of the puzzle to the table...

and then in time everyone gets to share in the communal dinner, so to speak.

And as I've been trying to say on this forum for a good 7-8 years now...wing chun does have something to offer at this mma feast.

what do you think it offers thats unique then? scooping the punch i have seen in thai and boxing against lazy punches , entering by checking the other arm i have seen in thai (but not often its too low percentage) steering wheel control is a standard grappling control point

i actually prefer his CSW tapes for enteries, going under the punch or puching into the clinch, i do not like reaching for the clinch or for punches like he showed here

[t_niehoff]

LOL... Eric is demonstrating exactly what I've been saying here forever. Chi sao, when done realistically, is going to be no different than clinch fighting. Watch that clip without the sound and you would never know when he was talking about chi sao, fuk sao, or any of the rest.

Compare what you saw in that clip with what you see 99% of WC people doing when they are doing chi sao and they look completely different.

Notice how you didn't see one of those slappy little backfists to the face, throat, and trunk area that you see all over the place when you see two guys doing chi sao.

If anything, what Eric showed there supports T's assertions about attached fighting.

Exactly.

Chi sao is a drill/exercise to practice the WCK movement in contact (for example, bong, tan, bong to tan, etc.) but it isn't fighting, and fighting won't "look" like chi sao.

But it makes absolutely no sense for an art's main, signature exercise ("the heart of WCK") to be an attached drill (called chi sao -- sticking arms or flexibly-attached arms) to learn or practice an art that is essentially noncontact. Nor does it make sense when you learn that the faat mun that is across lineages/styles describes contact/joining as the first step in fighting. I could go on and on, but when you are stuck in your dogmatic bubble ("Judo Chop Chueng is right") you are in an intellectual black hole (fantasy) from which you cannot escape.

When I use WCK at the MMA gym, no one recognizes it as WCK -- it looks like some variation of MT to them, as it is the only method they know that involves clinch and pound. All functional arts that fight in the clinch are going to agree on a fundamental level since they will all use those things that prove to work in attached fighting.

[t_niehoff]

***This is just pure rubbish. You, yourself destroyed Niehoff's assertions about using wing chun during "attached" mode (ie.- his amateur hour statements about using tan sao to get out of a MT plum - and his totally clueless claim that elbow strikes are wing chun's primary weapon)...

Ah, no he didn't.

and now you say that he knows what he's talking about?! Rubbish.

You see, Dale, your lack of wing chun knowledge at anything more than a rudimentary level becomes more and more apparent with each of your posts.

When Erik Paulson shows the wider width of the rolling motion - he rightly puts his finger on the fact that at that distance away from the opponent - if you're not going to strike - then you have to account for the opponent's ability to come around your arms/elbows when they're held close to your centerline and ribs...

That's exactly what you want him to do (which is why we control the center, to make him go around).

by widening the horizontal distance (expanding the width) between your arms...

so for example, in long arm chi sao, when the arms are further extended because you're further away from the opponent - you would look very similar to what Erik does when he...................
starts to come in for the double bicep ties and refers to them as use of the wing chun fuk sao and the chi sao rolling motion.

There is no "long arm chi sao".

Chi sao is just a drill/exercise to learn the movements/action. It doesn't teach you how to apply WCK.

Furthermore, the fact that Erik only works in this vid with going from some wing chun blocks, parries, and redirects (pak, bil, huen) to clinch, and some chi sao rolling motion to a fuk sao-like bicep tie...

and didn't include punching, palm strikes, and some use of block-and-strike...

doesn't mean that these aspects of wing chun can't be done against a skilled, resisting opponent. It simply means that he chose not to deal with any of that.

His focus in this vid was on something else.

Do you recall any posts of mine from previous threads (say about a year or two ago) wherein I wrote about punching at the opponent's shoulder lines?

Now compare that idea with Erik's idea (and what he actually demos) about using his left arm to bridge into his opponent's right arm/shoulder/bicep area...and his right arm doing the same against the opponent's left...

and see how this squares with the wing chun concepts about virtually always using two arms at the same time - as in some version of simultaneous (or near simultaneous) attack and defense.

Think about it.

You're so utterly clueless I don't know where to begin!

And btw, Dale, you're right about the hip pumping and pidgeon-toed stances - as they have no place in what Erik is getting at on that vid.

Because you don't know what you're doing.

But just keep on practicing with your scrub students and watching videos you don't understand, and living in your fantasy bubble listening to Judo Chop Cheung's stories and theories.

[YungChun]

Ladies and Gentlemen.................Mister Conway Twitty


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJVCjnAolp8

[sanjuro_ronin]

in my experience and opinion, an obvious feature of TCMA which contrubutes negatively to it's functionality is an obsession with attempting to both capture fluid movement in static posture AND to "stylize" it. It results in ridiculous posturing (pun intended) and later made up "rules" to explain/rationalize stuff that was never quite true to begin with

Well said Dave.

[sanjuro_ronin]

LOL... Eric is demonstrating exactly what I've been saying here forever. Chi sao, when done realistically, is going to be no different than clinch fighting. Watch that clip without the sound and you would never know when he was talking about chi sao, fuk sao, or any of the rest.

Compare what you saw in that clip with what you see 99% of WC people doing when they are doing chi sao and they look completely different.

Notice how you didn't see one of those slappy little backfists to the face, throat, and trunk area that you see all over the place when you see two guys doing chi sao.

If anything, what Eric showed there supports T's assertions about attached fighting.

Well, unless Eric has changed his views on WC since the last seminar I attended, and this is quite possible as it was sometime ago, I don't see how he views WC as "attached fighting" since, if I recall correctly, he said it was, in his view, a system of striking to "avoid" the clinch, in his view, again if I recall correctly, once the clinch is locked in, the fight will "degenerate" into a grappling match.

[sanjuro_ronin]

You're an utter moron.

totally clueless.

If you have a point to make, please make it, personal attacks are ridiculous.