Alan Orr Wing Chun Question's 7 - Angles and Pressure

[sanjuro_ronin]

"How many combat drops have you made sir ? "
"Err, ahhh, 23....simulated, no, er, actual combat drops. "
" ...you're kidding ?"
" This will be my first.....but I have done a lot of sticky rolling ."

I know you feel mm my brother.

Actually, its funny you mention combat drops.
I had already done skydiving before I joined the army, so when I went to get "airborne qualified" I though it was gonna be a piece of cake.
It was totally different because of the gear ( of course).
The instruction was basically the same though.
Then I did my first combat jump ( instruction basically the same) and MAN was THAT different.

[JPinAZ]

I have had great feedback from my clips, as many like our understanding of wing chun.

Good for you, that must help your ego.

How you tell me its right or wrong? Holding someone away from you in a demo application does not mean it will work with a real opponent.

I didn't say right or wrong - either it follows WCK principles, or you are doing something else.. Just because you don't understand how to control someone without going into body-on-body man-loving doesn't mean it can't be don't, even with a 'real opponent' (whatever that means - like there is any other kind? )

CSL is tried and tested so we are sharing our feedback not yours.

Who are you kidding? You don't mind feedback, just as long as it's 'great feedback' like you stated at the beginning of your post. If you can't handle feedback that differs from your own opinion then you probably should either grow some thicker skin or stop post up your clips on a discussion forum.
Sounds like someone's got some insecurity issues (?)

[Happy Tiger]

I'm not sure what your point is - why do you feel we need this again? No offence intended, but wasn't this already done when WCK was being created 100's of years ago?

Unless you are implying the information is lost or incomplete and/or needs reverse engineering because understanding has been lost? That could be true for some, but I'm sure there are many here and elsewhere that don't see thier WCK as incomplete or lacking (myself included). While I would agree it is good to cross talk and share both on forums like this and in person, I'm just not seeing your point on the rest.

Hi JPinAZ, how's it goin?
The fact that many experts on VT do not agree on things like deployment of stratagy, tools and appropreate use suggest to me development is still wanting. In the 'old days' fighters knew less but sought more. Imagine the forum talk 150 years ago during the development of chi sau. "This isn't VT you're 'adding' stuff you wouldn't have to if your VT was as it should be" and such. VT IMO is complete within it's own 'idiom' but it is very hard to tell from in the matrix standpoint whether something is complete. I've had very good success with VT in amature free fighting and security/bruiser/doorman rolls as well as an instrument of internal development.I still test and study and learn because from my experience things can still improve and coordinate. For all VTs popularity we see precious little of it in real life, or say on youtube being used in defence or in the ring but this is changing thanks to continuing development. Maybe not so much in the 'basics' but in composition, scope and integration with other fighting methods. Development of scientific rationale, mesurment of 'internal' workings,artistic interpretation and personal journey, methods of tailoring and exploiting the most from this allready potent style. All along trying not to forget what we allready know. I'm very lucky. I love internal martial development and can feel it at a deep and instinctive level. I also love to fight. OOOOHHHHH yeah!!! VT can develop but i understand the fear of loosing VT's inate 'isness' and quality. So review, historical research and progress is all needed.To all those who have already done this in the past and continue to do this today, I salute you.
Thomas Raymond Reichert, student of Ving Tsun

[Happy Tiger]

P.S. You can really tell by the cut of ones jib who really is using VT for live combat/ security. Too bad often they are not fans of so many other valuable faucets of the diamond VT.

[Hendrik]

Hi JPinAZ, how's it goin?
The fact that many experts on VT do not agree on things like deployment of stratagy, tools and appropreate use suggest to me development is still wanting. In the 'old days' fighters new less but sought more. Imagine the forum talk 150 years ago during the development of chi sau. "This isn't VT you're 'adding' stuff you wouldn't have to if your VT was as it should be" and such. VT IMO is complete within it's own 'idiom' but it is very hard to tell from in the matrix standpoint whether something is complete. I've had very good success with VT in amature free fighting and security/bruiser/doorman rolls as well as an instrument of internal development.I still test and study and learn because from my experience things can still improve and coordinate. For all VTs popularity we see precious little of it in real life, or say on youtube being used in defence or in the ring but this is changing thanks to continuing development. Maybe not so much in the 'basics' but in composition, scope and integration with other fighting methods. Development of scientific rationale, mesurment of 'internal' workings,artistic interpretation and personal journey, methods of tailoring and exploiting the most from this allready potent style. All along trying not to forget what we allready know. I'm very lucky. I love internal martial development and can feel it at a deep and instinctive level. I also love to fight. OOOOHHHHH yeah!!! VT can develop but i understand the fear of loosing VT's inate 'isness' and quality. So review, historical research and progress is all needed.To all those who have already done this in the past and continue to do this today, I salute you.
Thomas Raymond Reichert, student of Ving Tsun

Not talking born natural talented genius such as a tiger.

For general human beings,

The art of combat can be learn systematically, in fact , there are evidence across china in tcma, by 1850, learn art of combat is a well define process. It is not theory but basic elements needs to be known in order to perform.


For typical human beings like me,

Learning the elements doesn't guarantee to become the best fighter, however, it is educated enough for one to know how to handle the situation well.
Failing to recognize and learn those basic elements will cause issue in combat.


Combat is not a trial and Erro game , combat is well calculated hit to stike out. With what, when, where, how to do the job in min time.
One has no guarantee to win even knowing what, when, where, and how. Not knowing them is disaster . This is not a theory but do one has a basic handling?

And often, one walks away even the handling is secure and just wait for execution, that is because every act has a. Consequence , sport and combat are different things.