The Key

[YungChun]

Hmmm, here we go again...



But then, what about this?



Oh, and this one:



Of course he'll have another weak, backtracking, lame a55 excuse for this contradiction as well..

Completely consistent inconsistency.. LMAO..

[sanjuro_ronin]

Hey Paul doesn't SPM grab?

Yep, throats, biceps, neck, lats, the girl next door with the daisy duke shorts...

[JPinAZ]

***GET USED TO THAT, Niersun. He does it all the time. He puts something out there as "gospel" - and then when the flaws in what he says are exposed - he goes in a very different direction while trying to make believe he never said what in fact he did say previously.

The guy is a fraud.

BUT A CLEVER ONE....for example, his use of the term "attached" fighting...HE CLEARLY meant in his original numerous posts on this that he was talking about clinch fighting/grappling as a big part of his definition...

but now...well...he's just talking CONTROLLING people with things like lop sao and some other wing chun moves.

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiight.

BECAUSE: myself and other people kept arguing with him post-after-post that while wing chun uses such "controlling" bridge work as a means to achieve it's main strategey - hitting people - he kept saying nooooooooooooooo...

BUT NOW LOOK WHAT HE'S SAYING.

The guy is a douche bag.

Don't forget the thread a while back where he also argued against al lot of these various forms of 'control' being a joke, but now he is talking out the other side of his mouth on that one too!

[Ultimatewingchun]

As regards your post#74 on the preceding page:

Man, you're getting good at this !!!

[YungChun]

Yep, throats, biceps, neck, lats, the girl next door with the daisy duke shorts...

Hmmmm love to see that last app..

But don't you guys grab the lower arm too or no?

[t_niehoff]

In that case, somebody developing the system forgot to figure out the fact that some forms of grabbing don't work so well.

I think that WCK gives you a method (laid out in strategic steps), some tools (actions/movements) you need to execute it, and some clues to help you work it out, but it is up to the individual to work out how they can best use the tools -- and how to not use the tools -- for himself.

But you're not going to work it out through the classical drills. They only teach you and let you practice the movement/actions themselves, and are not application.

It's up to each of us to learn how to use the tools -- or not use them -- BY trying to use the tools (in fighting).

Don't you think that grabbing your opponent is one way to control him (so that you can pound him)?

[Knifefighter]

Wow... the fact that you guys can't tell that these "grabs" are two completely differing movements, as well as completely differing principles, pretty much proves both your cluelessness about both structural integrity as well as the centerline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt3rOtqnnDk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3o6QjvRQ2U

Talk about not knowing basics.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Hmmmm love to see that last app..

But don't you guys grab the lower arm too or no?

I tend to fight beyond that point so I don't.
There are some dim mak reasons for grabbing it, but to be honest, I have never been much of a grabber, even though I can close a COC #2 and almost do a 250 ( half way)

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Talk about not knowing the basics." (Dale)
.........................

***Talk about trying to pull off the old...

"Who do you believe, me, or your lyin' eyes" routine.

LOL

[YungChun]

Wow... the fact that you guys can't tell that these "grabs" are two completely differing movements, as well as completely differing principles, pretty much proves both your cluelessness about both structural integrity as well as the centerline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt3rOtqnnDk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3o6QjvRQ2U

Talk about not knowing basics.

Yes those are different grabs..but both are lops.. One is inside lop the other is outside lop.. I shouldn't have to tell someone with 6 years? experience in Chun that.. Who's clueless?

Moreover, respect to Phil but I don't agree with Phil's example since it depends on the opponent *leaving* the arm out there to be lopped in the second action.. It's hard enough to lop on the outside in the initial action of contact, let alone in the second action..

[t_niehoff]

Hmmm, here we go again...

Originally Posted by t_niehoff
Of course not. As I have repeatedly (as I am often reminded) said, WCK is controlling WHILE striking -- it is not, like some knuckleheads keep misrepresenting, standing grappling. It is pushing, pulling, pressing, lifting, sinking, etc. WHILE you strike. The striking is continually going on. But the objective is not just to strike, it is to keep hi structure broken so that we can continue to strike in safety.

But then, what about this?

Originally Posted by t_niehoff V
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.

Man, you are an idiot, aren't you? Seriously, you don't see what I am saying? It's like some of you have 3rd grade reading levels.

OK, try to follow it then -- WCK's method is to control while striking. Got that so far? OK, good. So what do we need to do to control? Use grappling. Striking ALONE won't control anyone. Grappling involves pushing, pulling, lifting, grabbing, etc. Striking doesn't involve those things. Chi sao is literally sticking arms -- or an exercise for practicing sticking skills. Sticking is grappling.

Why do we practice grappling/sticking skills? To be able to control our opponent so that we can strike him with safety (and not get struck ourselves), to maximize our shots, etc.

Oh, and this one:

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

Of course he'll have another weak, backtracking, lame a55 excuse for this contradiction as well..

Tell me, Einstein, what do you think sustained contact, being attached, is if not grappling? Hmmm?

If you wanted to teach someone to control their opponent while striking him -- to stay attached and use pushing, pulling, wedging, sinking, etc. movements to break your opponent's structure while you hit him -- do you think that you might come up with a platform/exercise where you do just that?

I hope this helps you: http://www.marin.edu/~don/study/7read.html

[tigershorty]

chi sao isn't grappling. chi sao if anything prevents grappling by teaching how to flow with energy and natural structure progressions. neither is "sticking".

if you want to go way abstract, then i can see it, but i think you're reaching. there is a common knowledge implied about "grappling" and chi sao is not it. chi sao is an exercise, grappling is not.

of course, if you have to try and debunk jpinaz's intelligence for him calling you out where you were inconsistent, then i think you have far larger problems.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Welcome, tigershorty, to the Terence Niehoff wing chun amateur hour segment of our program.

At this juncture all false notions about the nature of wing chun chi sao, wing chun fighting applications, and an entire general sense as to what wing chun is all about...

get brought to the surface...so that they can be exposed.

Welcome.

[tigershorty]

i think T probably makes some good points here and there, but the context is what always makes me frown.

Taking a good idea like removing your assailant's structure is a good idea. But then adding a bunch of projected ideas to the said idea is a verbose circle jerk of words.

Using other peoples vocabulary to better communicate is a good idea, but you should be careful when using those words because they have a more common meaning to most people. It's easy to be misunderstood and seem flip-floppish if you use such words poorly or out of context. (grapple)

A huge problem with WCK is that loads and loads of bullsh1t has been piled onto that core, obfuscating it. Most people can't find that core through all the bullsh1t.

[YungChun]

Don't you think that grabbing your opponent is one way to control him (so that you can pound him)?

From what I can tell Dale agrees with any and all grabbing in fighting so long as the grab has no connection to Wing Chun--the words Lop or sao is not used and there are no references to bridging, sticking or control in any Chun sense.. Also you must not be wearing a Wing Chun T-shirt or other insignia that could be attributed to Wing Chun or say the words Wing or Chun in the same sentence before during or after a grab.

Folks can improve the chances of a grab working in fighting simply by telling the opponent that the grab they are about to do is in no way connected to the art of Wing Chun and will in no way be used in any Wing Chun context...