Don't bother to read this

[KPM]

Maybe in your dummy and clinching dhi sao.

You know Kevin, sometimes you post some good stuff, and then other times I really have to scratch my head and wonder! I've been impressed with the limited CHI SAO video I have seen of PB....haven't seen any actual sparring/fighting video. But you guys make his approach sound very one-dimensional. So far you have suggested that in PB's version of Wing Chun:

1. You never step into the opponent
2. You never step back from the opponent
3. You never pivot or rotate
4. You never use "springy" energy
5. You don't engage the opponent with arm to arm contact


What I described are essential actions from a clinch-like position. A clinch-like position is any position where you are within punching range of the opponent and he has obstructed you in some way...which usually involves each persons arms in contact. Boxers end up in this position, Muay Thai ends up in this position, MMA ends up in this position......what makes you think Wing Chun is any different? Chi Sao is not fighting. But Chi Sao trains some essential things from this "clinch" range and how to react from this arm contact. Should such contact be avoided? Sure! In a perfect world! But it happens. For you to deny such footwork that I mentioned above is part of Wing Chun shows a very one-dimensional approach to Wing Chun! I doubt very seriously that PB sees it that way. So again, I have to wonder where you are coming from.

[GlennR]

You know Kevin, sometimes you post some good stuff, and then other times I really have to scratch my head and wonder! I've been impressed with the limited CHI SAO video I have seen of PB....haven't seen any actual sparring/fighting video. But you guys make his approach sound very one-dimensional. So far you have suggested that in PB's version of Wing Chun:

1. You never step into the opponent
2. You never step back from the opponent
3. You never pivot or rotate
4. You never use "springy" energy
5. You don't engage the opponent with arm to arm contact


What I described are essential actions from a clinch-like position. A clinch-like position is any position where you are within punching range of the opponent and he has obstructed you in some way...which usually involves each persons arms in contact. Boxers end up in this position, Muay Thai ends up in this position, MMA ends up in this position......what makes you think Wing Chun is any different? Chi Sao is not fighting. But Chi Sao trains some essentially things from this "clinch" range and how to react from this arm contact. Should such contact be avoided? Sure! In a perfect world! But it happens. For you to deny such footwork that I mentioned above is part of Wing Chun shows a very one-dimensional approach to Wing Chun! I don't very seriously that PB sees it that way. So again, I have to wonder where you are coming from.

I agree with you on this Keith. Kevin and the boys contradict themselves all the time as far as I'm concerned and I've only recently had a running battle with graham to concede that they do have to deal with those "pesky arms".

But I guess when all you o s bong-lap then things aren't that hard

[KPM]

btw Emmett, you're not my Sihing, just so you know...

I don't know you, and I don't know Emmett. But that was rather a tacky thing to say. Where did Emmett suggest he was "pulling rank" on you, or anything of the sort? I agree with what he wrote. Like Kevin, you tend to make your understanding of Wing Chun sound very "one-dimensional." Sure there is rotation...when appropriate. But there is also straight line action! I will direct you to my previous post where I listed some essential actions when engaged with an opponent. Only one of them involved rotation.

[KPM]

I agree with you on this Keith. Kevin and the boys contradict themselves all the time as far as I'm concerned and I've only recently had a running battle with graham to concede that they do have to deal with those "pesky arms".

But I guess when all you o s bong-lap then things aren't that hard

Yeah. Like I said, Kevin can post some good stuff. Brooklyn isn't that far from D.C. Sometimes I think it would be a good idea to pop up there and spend some time with Kevin to see what this PB approach to Wing Chun is all about. Then he posts stuff like this and comes across as a total @%$$, and I think...."naw, maybe not!"

[k gledhill]

You know Kevin, sometimes you post some good stuff, and then other times I really have to scratch my head and wonder! I've been impressed with the limited CHI SAO video I have seen of PB....haven't seen any actual sparring/fighting video. But you guys make his approach sound very one-dimensional. So far you have suggested that in PB's version of Wing Chun:

1. You never step into the opponent
2. You never step back from the opponent
3. You never pivot or rotate
4. You never use "springy" energy
5. You don't engage the opponent with arm to arm contact


What I described are essential actions from a clinch-like position. A clinch-like position is any position where you are within punching range of the opponent and he has obstructed you in some way...which usually involves each persons arms in contact. Boxers end up in this position, Muay Thai ends up in this position, MMA ends up in this position......what makes you think Wing Chun is any different? Chi Sao is not fighting. But Chi Sao trains some essentially things from this "clinch" range and how to react from this arm contact. Should such contact be avoided? Sure! In a perfect world! But it happens. For you to deny such footwork that I mentioned above is part of Wing Chun shows a very one-dimensional approach to Wing Chun! I don't very seriously that PB sees it that way. So again, I have to wonder where you are coming from.

You're changing up the list I referred to. You implied from chi sao and the context was discussion of using turning etc. from chi sao correlations. In other words you're attempting to use a drill position of complying students who allow the proximity and arm equalization for drills as a 1:1 fighting application. : )

If you're in NYC drop by its easier to show you a diagonal line is better than straight into the face of a clinch.

[WC1277]

Here is the thing I am not trying like you are to tell people there is a so called right way to do things. Since you are saying you know how things should be done I am asking you to show us you can do them. Same with Hendrik the poster boy for arm chair wing chun.

Yes yes everyone has a foundation in the ideas but guess what? We do not fight with ideas we fight with actions. If you want to say that you do this or that in training that is cool but when you start talking about having an understanding of how things work in fighting that begs the question what do you know about fighting?

There are two kinds of analysis talk. How do you deal with a boxer? The first kind has people who have put in the time sparring with boxers telling what worked for them, what did not work for them, what their observations were, what to look out for, and so forth. This is the view of experience. The second kind has people who have not done that and are not doing that telling us how they think it should be done with principles and concepts and physics lol. This is the view from the arm chair.

You are right about one thing my reflex is to not believe the arm chair guys because I know from experience they do not know what they are talking about when they start talking about anything beyond forms and drills since that is all they do.

Where do I insist my way is the one and only right way? I usually get attacked or made fun of for any statement I make and I spend my time defending it.

[WC1277]

I don't know you, and I don't know Emmett. But that was rather a tacky thing to say. Where did Emmett suggest he was "pulling rank" on you, or anything of the sort? I agree with what he wrote. Like Kevin, you tend to make your understanding of Wing Chun sound very "one-dimensional." Sure there is rotation...when appropriate. But there is also straight line action! I will direct you to my previous post where I listed some essential actions when engaged with an opponent. Only one of them involved rotation.

Tacky? Did you read his response to me after I tried to apologize and further explain my perspective?

[WC1277]

Sure there is rotation...when appropriate. But there is also straight line action! I will direct you to my previous post where I listed some essential actions when engaged with an opponent. Only one of them involved rotation.

No sh!t!

People's responses is becoming ridiculous on this forum with the loss of context. It's like you have to post a complete bible on WC for someone not to throw a fit. For the last time, it is of my opinion, that "balanced rotation" is the cornerstone of good WC and if trained well will significantly improve your WC. When in a real situation there will most likely be NO arm contact! You will have to MOVE. If you want to think straight lines of movement is going to give you a leg up, more power to you, but I think you will probably get knocked out trying to chase a moving target that way.

[k gledhill]

Where do I insist my way is the one and only right way? I usually get attacked or made fun of for any statement I make and I spend my time defending it.

This statement is wrong on so many levels .

[WC1277]

This statement is wrong on so many levels .

Thanks for proving my point...

[LFJ]

If you want to think straight lines of movement is going to give you a leg up, more power to you, but I think you will probably get knocked out trying to chase a moving target that way.

Think, think, think.

Do you have free sparring in your school?

The majority of schools I've been to even in HK are maybe 10% form and 90% chi-sau with 0% actual sparring, but a whole lot of thinking and theorizing about what fighting is like and why their approach will work. That's including WSLVT schools.

[WC1277]

Think, think, think.

Do you have free sparring in your school?

The majority of schools I've been to even in HK are maybe 10% form and 90% chi-sau with 0% actual sparring, but a whole lot of thinking and theorizing about what fighting is like and why their approach will work. That's including WSLVT schools.

That's funny!

You're under David Peterson, right?

btw I've done plenty. Is it part of class time? No. Do students do it and other things after class? Yes. You don't need to waste the time for drills and development on sparring. I love how some think that because it's part of their 'class time', that somehow that validates it.

[LFJ]

You're under David Peterson, right?

No.

You don't need to waste the time for drills and development on sparring. I love how some think that because it's part of their 'class time', that somehow that validates it.

Sparring too is developmental and is not real fighting. It's not good to never spar under the eye of your sifu.

[WC1277]

No.

My bad. I thought you were for some reason. You're WSL right? Who do you train with?

[k gledhill]

That's funny!

You're under David Peterson, right?

btw I've done plenty. Is it part of class time? No. Do students do it and other things after class? Yes. You don't need to waste the time for drills and development on sparring. I love how some think that because it's part of their 'class time', that somehow that validates it.

You don't have to waste time for drills and development on sparring ! Classic