I have interacted with many , you and I did too...I am aware that there are many ideas out there and some very similar to my current one, so its not lost on me to stay open minded. I may sound silly to you but Im looking at it from my perspective of technical execution of certain principles and concepts that TO ME define Ving Tsun. If I DONT see them and someone tells me in a clip 'its there you just cant see it ', and contradicts himself in the following clips.....Im saying what I see.
I am not detracting from Alans fighting or mma records etc...just the "you cant see my WC because..." I post clips to show what I consider VT with visible tangible execution and here we are
Last edited by k gledhill; 12-10-2011 at 09:19 AM.
LOL!!!l Of course I am opened minded. I have 4 martial arts teachers each excellent in their field. In conditioning I have 3 teachers again all very well respected in each area of skill.
How would I be able to train in BJJ to brown belt with a closed mind?? You are a joke. I have seen first hand your style so I already know what you are talking about - I just don't agree. But unlike you I have no need to make a big thing about it. Maybe because I am not worried about people having other points of view and your case being worried about a system of wing chun you can't understand. The fact that you can not see or understand the difference in my system and why we have just a good track record - tells me me only one thing. You have a limited view point of wing chun.
Last edited by Alan Orr; 12-10-2011 at 05:42 PM.
There are dead people in Thailand, because of elbow strikes to the temple. Not using an elbow because you are risking it, is like saying you don't want to use a fist, because you donīt want to break a knuckle, or have your arm broken by a counter technique.....
Again, I find it hard to believe that someone has a Wing Chun system out there that does not use the elbow as a weapon!
Actually, it would be interesting to see Alan Orrīs opinion regarding the phenomenon of "elbowless wing chun".
Last edited by Hardwork108; 12-10-2011 at 11:12 PM.
Again, there are some elbow strikes depending on position/situation, but we prefer to go back to punching distance given it is more advantageous as you are able to flank while attacking. It's about weighing risks and benefits in the strategies you use.
Dio perdona... Io no!
Exactly, Buddah_Fist.
If the elbow is the closest weapon to the target and you can use it without putting yourself in a bad position, you use it.
Michael almost knocked me out once with an elbow strike during sparring. I got too close and tried to grapple him...and boom.
@Phil and Kevin:
I really hope you guys meet up. Friendly exchange is what we desperately need in the wing chun community.
have to agree with you. And i have no experience in WC. I don't know any system in MA that doesn't take the elbow inot account.Again, I find it hard to believe that someone has a Wing Chun system out there that does not use the elbow as a weapon!
Originally posted by BawangOriginally posted by Bawangi had an old taichi lady talk smack behind my back. i mean comon man, come on. if it was 200 years ago,, mebbe i wouldve smacked her and took all her monehs.i am manly and strong. do not insult me cracker.
your life seems to revlove pretty much around telling others how wing chun should be done without actually showing them, nice life mate, as for the name calling well its about what i expect from you these days when your panties are in a twist
I Dont think you are desperate to be believed i think you are a classic LARPER fanboy
there used to be a few tell tell signs of larping on here lets see if you fit any of them (just for fun):
1) no clips anywhere (check)
2) always talking about your many street fights (check) and years on the door (check)
3) hero worship of one master and lineage as the correct way (check)
4) blinkered belief that your way is the only way (check)
5) constant willingness to post about how bad other linegaes are (check)
look 5 out of 5 well done mate
Last edited by k gledhill; 12-11-2011 at 06:16 AM.