WCK Strategies

[couch]

Very good!

WRT to "sounds like JKD", Hawkins showed me the stuff Bruce shared with him in HK. I think its fine, but it is heavily dependent upon your timing, skill, and your physical attributes.

No matter what the strategy, all WCK people share overlaps. Maybe some emphasize more than others. Its good to have this forum to discuss.

WCK is not a complete fighting art encompassing throws, joint locks, takedowns, grappling, nor long range kicks, or long range strikes but has its favored specialty.

I don't understand when you say that JKD is "heavily dependent upon your timing, skill, and your physical attributes."

Simply, isn't ALL fighting (and finding your personal expression in it all) about timing, skill and personal physical attributes?

[k gledhill]

Wow! We can have a "civil" discuss here! Good thread so far!

give it time

[LoneTiger108]

Speed.

If I cannot be stronger than my opponent(s), I have to be faster than them to achieve the steps/sequence of actions I need to achieve; be it breaking structure, trapping and/or striking.

We must be on similar pages here as I too rely on speed 80% of the time. Also, if you read what I wrote, the rest of what you mention highlights what I said too. FIRST you must have accuracy, THEN speed before power can be developed correctly. Ofcourse, how do we drill accuracy? For me, it's on my wooden man and through weaponry drills.

Another example is knife works, instead of going for the kill with the first strike, it may be easier to first destroy the weapon arm first, THEN move in for the kill, IF necessary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgjGtcBPr8c

Good clip, but it's a shame you didn't demo the combos with a 'proper knife' instead of the poor excuse for a blade you used! No offence intended here, but you do use a standard wing chun blade in kulo don't you? If so, why not show that instead?

[LSWCTN1]

Remember, even some systems like Lama were created to not stick. Boxing also follows that.

Just wanted to raise a query around this point, Robert.

If most southern tcma's have a sticking principle then it makes sense that an art used to fight against it must also have sticking principles too.

lets take wing chun...

do you not feel that, at least in the western world, boxing (or a poor imitation of it) is what you are going to face on the street? therefore shouldnt the art be modified for use and the striking elements, more akin to what i see coming from Bayer et al, be more heavily emphasised than the sticking elements?

I know how to stick to a boxer and tie them up too. but most wing chun guys (probably myself included) are three second fighters. we train to enter and bang. hard. not stopping till the opponent is down. that IMHO is more the reason that there are few successful competition fighters using wing chun... fitness levels.

just some musings of mine, may not even make sense to anyone else???

[t_niehoff]

Speed.

If I cannot be stronger than my opponent(s), I have to be faster than them to achieve the steps/sequence of actions I need to achieve; be it breaking structure, trapping and/or striking.

But speed is not achieved just by moving physically faster (although it helps), but by being more efficient. Steps/sequence of actions does not need to be rushed or complex, but must not give the opponent(s) opportunities to fight back or it will fail.

Yes, and another way is to slow the opponent down. That is what breaking structure does.

For example, striking your opponent's head is a good way to end the fight, but only if it is done hard enough, and must pass through all his guards and his attacks. So the direct route may not be all that efficient.

Very true.

However, if I take steps to achieve the final goal, it may be more feasible. For example (example ONLY! Real fights there are many many variables.)
1. cover his elbows and knees, which are closer to me and quicker to get to, which also controls his movements.
2. control his balance, taking away his power, with not breaks in between. Which is easy once the elbows and knees are covered.
3. move in close enough to elbow him across the face, with as much power and momentum as you can; while his arms and legs are controlled and balance broken.
All done as quickly as possible without breaks in between.

You are describing WCK's method.

Another example is knife works, instead of going for the kill with the first strike, it may be easier to first destroy the weapon arm first, THEN move in for the kill, IF necessary.

Using the knife to "explain" WCK's strategy is not a bad idea.

[t_niehoff]

Just wanted to raise a query around this point, Robert.

If most southern tcma's have a sticking principle then it makes sense that an art used to fight against it must also have sticking principles too.

I don't think that is true. I think what really matters is who can impose their game on the other.

lets take wing chun...

do you not feel that, at least in the western world, boxing (or a poor imitation of it) is what you are going to face on the street? therefore shouldnt the art be modified for use and the striking elements, more akin to what i see coming from Bayer et al, be more heavily emphasised than the sticking elements?

So, are you suggesting that if my opponent wants to fight in free-movement (the outside) that I should do so too -- that I beat him at his own game? That I let him dictate how the fight goes?

As I said, IMO you want to IMPOSE your game.

I know how to stick to a boxer and tie them up too. but most wing chun guys (probably myself included) are three second fighters. we train to enter and bang. hard. not stopping till the opponent is down. that IMHO is more the reason that there are few successful competition fighters using wing chun... fitness levels.

The problem is that (the 3 second thingy) is not generally how a fight will go (unless you are a) very lucky, b) facing someone very poorly skilled/conditioned or c) you sucker punch him!). Even when the opponent goes down, the fight isn't over -- sometimes it is just beginning.

The reason there are so few successful WCK fighters is that most people in WCK don't really train to be fighters. It seems to me for most people a TMA is like being a member of the SCA! You know, those guys at the park who dress up like knights and playfight with swords and bucklers,etc. Why don't you see them at fencing competitions?

It's great that you know how to stick to a boxer -- but that doesn't mean you will be able to or do it against all boxers. If you can do it, you can do it AT A CERTAIN LEVEL (your skill level) -- that's the critical thing to remember. You may know how to pass the guard too -- but at what level can you consistently pull it off? If the boxer is better skilled than you are, you won't be able to tie him up; just like if the grappler is better skilled than you, you may not be able to pass his guard. You develop skill by doing it and by doing it against better people.

[t_niehoff]

***What I disagree with is the "very good" when I give my "wing chun" strategies that include leads, crosses, overhands, and rounds combined with wing chun punches - but it's no longer a compatible tool set with wing chun when Niehoff calls it out. I find that to be very hypocritical, Robert.

Robert and I are both saying that YOUR strategy of leads, crosses, overhands, and rounds combined with wing chun punches may be "very good" (Robert) but is NOT WCK since your leads, crosses, overhands, etc. uses a different delivery system.

OF COURSE IT'S COMPATIBLE.

Whether or not it is "compatible" (and IMO it is not), the point is that it is NOT WCK. The mere fact that you talk about compatibility admits that you know it is not WCK.

I'm using wing chun centerline principles along his shoulder lines, as I explained - and my elbows can drop down into the basic positioning for wing chun vertical punches in the blink of an eye.

There is more to it than that.

[free2flow]

Using the knife to "explain" WCK's strategy is not a bad idea.

As a practitioner of Filipino MA that specializes in close range fighting, this short statement carries a lot of meaning. This is one instance wherein the two arts really complement each other.

[chusauli]

I don't understand when you say that JKD is "heavily dependent upon your timing, skill, and your physical attributes."

Simply, isn't ALL fighting (and finding your personal expression in it all) about timing, skill and personal physical attributes?

All martial arts certainly depend upon your "timing, skill, and your physical attributes." What I am referring to is in order to intercept 100% and beat your opponent to the punch you have to be completely better in timing, skill, and physical attributes".

If you look at it another way, even Bruce Lee knew you couldn't intercept all the time. You can if you're fighting scrubs.

Try to intercept all the time next time you spar.

[chusauli]

Just wanted to raise a query around this point, Robert.

If most southern tcma's have a sticking principle then it makes sense that an art used to fight against it must also have sticking principles too.

lets take wing chun...

do you not feel that, at least in the western world, boxing (or a poor imitation of it) is what you are going to face on the street? therefore shouldnt the art be modified for use and the striking elements, more akin to what i see coming from Bayer et al, be more heavily emphasised than the sticking elements?

I know how to stick to a boxer and tie them up too. but most wing chun guys (probably myself included) are three second fighters. we train to enter and bang. hard. not stopping till the opponent is down. that IMHO is more the reason that there are few successful competition fighters using wing chun... fitness levels.

just some musings of mine, may not even make sense to anyone else???

I do feel that boxing or pseudo boxing is the most encountered skill/lack of skill you face on the street. My strategy when I am sticking is shutting down the delivery base and destroying structure. I have already nullified any offensive tools (except for hidden weapons). There is no pseudo-boxing. And most have not cultivated the same base WCK has, so it will collapse easier when under the pressure of sticking with the body as we advocate.

I am not saying a good fighter could not win, or use other tactics (like staying out of range) but I am explaining our strengths against the opponent's weakness.

I have not seen Bayer do what WCK does - destroy the base by extremely off centering, unbalancing or disabling structure. WCK's strategy is to use the body base to smother incoming attacks, and IMO, similar to BJJ, where they take you down and then can submit you or GNP you. If it works for him, and others, that's fine. To each their own.

As for many Southern fist arts yes, they do involve sticking - the short hand systems.

As for fitness levels and 3 seconds, its fine for "streetfighting" where you want to just get away and act in "self-defense". Not everyone has to be a ring fighter. But if you want to compete, conditioning is number 1.

Hope I answered your musings.

[chusauli]

Victor,

Without getting into a p!ssfest, I'll state it simply.

Using a "Trojan Horse" method is not WCK. You are getting in to then use WCK, its fine for fighting. But don't call the "Trojan Horse" WCK.

For example, if I use a ruse that I am drunk (a la Drunken Fist), and fall into you and then use WCK, is the "drunken fist" WCK?

You know the answer.

Please note I am not saying you are not skilled, or can't use that, or say that it won't work, or attacking your ego in anyway nor saying anything about TWC. I am just calling a "Trojan Horse" a "Trojan Horse".

[Wayfaring]

JKD is not WCK, although it borrows many tools from WCK. A look at the horse (or lack of one) and we know it is not.

I do not understand WCK's tendency towards drawing imaginary box lines around the art.

Functional arts don't do that. BJJ? H3ll no. Someone brings in a sambo footlock - "yes my fren. zhoo zhitsoo has had de footlock since de beginning - Helio taught dat me in 1976 fren. dat eddie bravo guy - he be teachin de techniques I do since purple belt - he just smoka de pot and namea dem de crazy names".

Which is complete BS, but illustrates the mindset.

WCK's mindset?

You just got 2nd place in a street fight, and the guy that beat you down leans over and says "Very nice. You stayed true to your WCK".

I mean OMG - he DARED to break out of the horse and let the goat out from between his knees.

[t_niehoff]

I do not understand WCK's tendency towards drawing imaginary box lines around the art.

I don't understand the tendency to try to make WCK anything and everything.

Functional arts don't do that. BJJ? H3ll no. Someone brings in a sambo footlock - "yes my fren. zhoo zhitsoo has had de footlock since de beginning - Helio taught dat me in 1976 fren. dat eddie bravo guy - he be teachin de techniques I do since purple belt - he just smoka de pot and namea dem de crazy names".

So, go put a spinning backfist in boxing, a functional martial art. You will be told that isn't boxing. That's not to say that it won't work -- but it isn't a boxing tool (historically) and it doesn't use boxing's delivery system (body mechanics).

However, that's not to say that functional arts don't have room for GROWTH -- BJJ is a great example of an art that does. So does boxing. But the growth in those arts MAINTAIN that art's delivery system (mechanics) and method.

Which is complete BS, but illustrates the mindset.

WCK's mindset?

You just got 2nd place in a street fight, and the guy that beat you down leans over and says "Very nice. You stayed true to your WCK".

Really? You think it a poor idea to take the things in your art and focus on making them work?

[chusauli]

I do not understand WCK's tendency towards drawing imaginary box lines around the art.

Functional arts don't do that. BJJ? H3ll no. Someone brings in a sambo footlock - "yes my fren. zhoo zhitsoo has had de footlock since de beginning - Helio taught dat me in 1976 fren. dat eddie bravo guy - he be teachin de techniques I do since purple belt - he just smoka de pot and namea dem de crazy names".

Which is complete BS, but illustrates the mindset.

WCK's mindset?

You just got 2nd place in a street fight, and the guy that beat you down leans over and says "Very nice. You stayed true to your WCK".

I mean OMG - he DARED to break out of the horse and let the goat out from between his knees.

Boxlines are just people's ways of organizing to teach a syllabus.

For fighting, functionality rules.

When you fight, its just you and the opponent at that moment.

[KPM]

All martial arts certainly depend upon your "timing, skill, and your physical attributes." What I am referring to is in order to intercept 100% and beat your opponent to the punch you have to be completely better in timing, skill, and physical attributes".

If you look at it another way, even Bruce Lee knew you couldn't intercept all the time. You can if you're fighting scrubs.

Try to intercept all the time next time you spar.

This is true! And Dan Inosanto himself said essentially the same thing on his "Definitive JKD" series of videos in 2000. He said that Bruce had physical skills far ahead of most people and that his final form of JKD was meant to make maximum use of those skills. But not all of us are born with the natural ability that Bruce had!