Why does MMA target WC?

[LoneTiger108]

The best place for that thought to stay is in your mind with all the other nonsense Spencer!

GH

Hmmm can you hear your own words G? I would listen to yourself more often too...

[CFT]

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...ad.php?t=61397

Thanks Graham. Not sure that article has enough detail to say VT is scientific or scientifcally proven. It might suggest that WSL followed the scientific method in his research and training, i.e. theory, practice, testing, observation --> feeding back again.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Pseudo Science
http://www.chem1.com/acad/sci/pseudosci.html

If Wing Chun principles were actually held up to a scientific standard, they would pretty much all be shown to be false. Applying scientific terms to something does not make you a scientist. For example, If I use kinetic linking to describe power generation, it doesn't make make me any more a a scientist than someone who describes power generation through chi or any other means.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Thanks Graham. Not sure that article has enough detail to say VT is scientific or scientifcally proven. It might suggest that WSL followed the scientific method in his research and training, i.e. theory, practice, testing, observation --> feeding back again.

It clearly demonstrates that WSL did not follow a scientific method. He claims to have only lost once. Science cannot prove. It can only disprove. Therefore, in the interest of science, one should lose many times to test or disprove specific hypotheses.

The article precisely reveals the pseudo science that WC is. Applying concepts of time space and energy are meaningless. Terminology is not science. Science as you point out is a method. Hypothesis, test, replication, and so on.

[k gledhill]

Science refers to VT ideas of utilizing certain ideas like unity of balance, axis lines, levers, alignment of force in da sao jik siu sao, using angles and body unity for mass in motion with Newtons 3rd law , Newtons cradle for ballistic displacement, in short force delivery. Centerline fighting is a science !!

But in use it just looks like I sent you 6 ft back on your a r s e with a simple punch

[HumbleWCGuy]

Science refers to VT ideas of utilizing certain ideas like unity of balance, axis lines, levers, alignment of force in da sao jik siu sao, using angles and body unity for mass in motion with Newtons 3rd law , Newtons cradle for ballistic displacement, in short force delivery. Centerline fighting is a science !!

But in use it just looks like I sent you 6 ft back on your a r s e with a simple punch

Again, science isn't terminology. It is a process. SCIENCE IS THE SYSTEMATIC STUDY OF SOMETHING. Applying scientific terminology to Wing Chun does not make it scientific because WC practitioners aren't trained to study the art systematically.

So describe to us how you apply Newton's third law?

[Graham H]

Hmmm can you hear your own words G? I would listen to yourself more often too...

We have different ideas on Kung Fu mate. Let's not start our internet love affair again eh? LOL

GH

[Graham H]

So describe to us how you apply Newton's third law?

No point because if you cant work that basic idea out then it's wasted on you my dear!

GH

[Graham H]

Thanks Graham. Not sure that article has enough detail to say VT is scientific or scientifcally proven. It might suggest that WSL followed the scientific method in his research and training, i.e. theory, practice, testing, observation --> feeding back again.

I disagree. How would you know?

GH

[HumbleWCGuy]

No point because if you cant work that basic idea out then it's wasted on you my dear!

GH

What I am about to do is to show you that you don't actually know what Newton's Third Law is. Likely, you have some lay idea of what it is which will be completely off base. You are wise to avoid the discussion. I fully expect for you to talk about something to do with simultaneous attack and defense which has nothing to do with Newton's law.

[CFT]

I disagree. How would you know?

I don't know about WSL himself since I didn't study with the man. If we are just going by that one article, it doesn't convince us that there is any science behind the ideas.

Just because he says:

Well, we can say that Ving Tsun embodies a very high degree of scientific analysis. We can treat it as a skill in fact. Science emphasizes the importance of accuracy and genuineness. Therefore it will be ok to apply it on the analysis of things.

... doesn't make it scientific.

However, statments like:

Pugilism emphasizes both theories and practices. My students failed because they lacked the sufficient practices which theories could not offset them.

... show he was not a theorist, but someone who understood the need for hard practice and testing.

The fact that he left behind a method that has been propagated pretty uniformily and still producing good results suggest he really had something.

[Frost]

If the TS is still around (which I highly doubt I suspect he’s sobered up and is long gone) the past page or so has probably illustrated why wing chun is singled out so much by MMA guys…and lord forgive me but Humble is really making some good points on here

[k gledhill]

Again, science isn't terminology. It is a process. SCIENCE IS THE SYSTEMATIC STUDY OF SOMETHING. Applying scientific terminology to Wing Chun does not make it scientific because WC practitioners aren't trained to study the art systematically.

So describe to us how you apply Newton's third law?

I have done so in previous posts, search and elucidation will follow.

Its not rocket scince with slide rules,and pipe smoking.

[Vajramusti]

I don't know about WSL himself since I didn't study with the man. If we are just going by that one article, it doesn't convince us that there is any science behind the ideas.

Just because he says:

... doesn't make it scientific.

However, statments like:

... show he was not a theorist, but someone who understood the need for hard practice and testing.

The fact that he left behind a method that has been propagated pretty uniformily and still producing good results suggest he really had something.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with Chee!!

joy chaudhuri

[HumbleWCGuy]

I don't argue that WC is very effective when properly done. Moreover, I don't discount it's fundamental principles. It just doesn't hold up as a science from where I am sitting. It is more like very good folk wisdom. In some cases, it's folk wisdom disguised as science.