UFC's Lyoto Machida + His Wrestling Coach Kenny Johnson: Chi Sao + Takedown Defense D

[anerlich]

The same could be said for a decent striker.

No argument from me.

[Syn7]

lol big country always reminded me of a tank abbot type of fighter but with a little more polish.

Compared to Roy Nelson, Tank Abbot is nothing. He had some wrestling and he could hit hard. Not to say he didn't have his qualities, it's just the Nelson is on a another level. It's more than a a lil polish. Better chin, better hands, better wrestling, he actually has a submission game. Nelson is no dummy. He also isn't a complete douche, which is something a can't say about Abbott. I gotta say, I did like watching him try to throw people out of the cage though.

[YouKnowWho]

IMO aspects of chi sao could be elevated by utilizing some of the principles found in grappling especially in the clinch, but unfortunately this may contradict some of the principles of traditional WC chi sao.

When you protect your center from inside out, a right Tan Shou followed by a left Tan Shou, you can wrap both of your opponent's arms. You can then do whatever you want after that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwX9-7fkD0Y

As showing in the above clip, if your opponent's arm spins with your arm, you may need to wrap his arm more than once. Now we are not talking about straight line any more. If you don't go beyond WC principle, you will never be able to open that "grappling" door.

[kung fu fighter]

Now we are not talking about straight line any more. If you don't go beyond WC principle, you will never be able to open that "grappling" door.

who says that's beyond WC principle, maybe in the yip man linage that you study. I can tell by your post you obviously haven't been exposed to the mainland wing chun linages lol. This is basic WC stuff.

[YouKnowWho]

who says that's beyond WC principle, maybe in the yip man linage that you study. I can tell by your post you obviously haven't been exposed to the mainland wing chun linages lol. This is basic WC stuff.

I have to admit that the only WC knowledge that I have is from the Yip Man system.

Could you put up a clip to make your point on this?

In another forum, someone said.

"Wing Chun has both lines and circles. Very small, efficient ones. It has been said that a circle shrunken infinitely becomes a point, which is also a section of a line..."

I'm still trying to figure that out.

[kung fu fighter]

I have to admit that the only WC knowledge that I have is from the Yip Man system.

Could you put up a clip to make your point on this? In another forum, someone said.

"Wing Chun has both lines and circles. Very small, efficient ones. It has been said that a circle shrunken infinitely becomes a point, which is also a section of a line..."

I'm still trying to figure that out.

check out the san sik (two-man drills) in this footage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ9K-W-WWzU
Here are some additional footage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7jflr0uZcc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XQ0j53-0zE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPGa2wrSiAk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeBmokwsTm0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeAxb7aqsfE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYhJn...EDBEF26759329C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KpRjsFlL1Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKc1cQRTPo0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cm7vjAqAvjg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8f2-adtfG8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN5Ix9hYYb4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxQz4rJqpvg

[YouKnowWho]

check out the san sik (two-man drills) in this footage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ9K-W-WWzU

That's good circular movement. Thanks for sharing. Now I have more faith in the WC system. For a while, I thought something important is missing.

I like the double outside in circle very much. It's very similar to this training.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jI_AOWtIrA

[kung fu fighter]

That's good circular movement. Thanks for sharing. Now I have more faith in the WC system. For a while, I thought something important is missing.

You are most welcome! I am always willing to help fellow wing chuner's on their journey. I was where you are about 15 years ago when i first started to research and explore the various interpretations of mainland wing chun, except at that time almost nothing was available publicly. I was fortunate enough to meet the right people whom helped me along the way, a big thank you to each and every one of them. Through my research of the various mainland wing chun linages, I feel I got a more complete understanding of what the art of wing chun was intended to be when our Ancestors developed it. It is a very complete system for what it was intended to do.

Best of luck on your wing chun journey!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob8frewJolg

[JPinAZ]

"Wing Chun has both lines and circles. Very small, efficient ones. It has been said that a circle shrunken infinitely becomes a point, which is also a section of a line..."

I'm still trying to figure that out.

IMO, this is a comment about WC's ideas of economy of motion & maximum efficiency.

That's good circular movement. Thanks for sharing. Now I have more faith in the WC system. For a while, I thought something important is missing.

I only watched the frist 3 clips KFF posted and IMO they had little to do with WC as I understand it from both HFY (non red boat) perspective, as well as my previous Ip Man/red boat training. To me, they were missing the most important and basic concept that makes wing chun 'wing chun', and that's centerline - No centerline, No wing chun.

[YouKnowWho]

To me, they were missing the most important and basic concept that makes wing chun 'wing chun', and that's centerline - No centerline, No wing chun.

Was the "circular" principle existed in WC but somebody removed it? Or was that principle not in WC and somebody added it in? As long as this principle is in the WC system today, why should we care? I'm glad that Kung Fu Fighter had pointed it out that some WC system in mainland China has that principle.

You can protect your centerline from "outside in" as well as from "inside out". You don't have to choose "either ... or ...". To develop your hook punch has no conflict with your jab, cross development.

This kind of thinking, "my style doesn't do this", "This is against my style principle" is not healthy IMO.

[JPinAZ]

I wasn't just talking about just protecting your center space from a given direction. And I agree, you can do it from in to out or out to in. I was talking about Wing Chun centerline principles that I didn't see in the clips I watched. IMO, 'Protecting the line' is a basic idea of centerline for early students IMO (no offence meant to early students!).

Wing Chun centerline principle is more than just protecting a plane in front of you. It also has to do with your own CL & gravity (self centerline), initial setup & proper facing to your opponent along with engagement & contact (A-to-B centerline), and finally gravity with your opponent (more based on energy). And I hardly saw any of these thing in the first 3 clips

IMO, it's not about what's healthy or style, it's about what is and what isn't Wing Chun based on principle. And it's really simple - No Centerline principle, no Wing Chun

[Kellen Bassette]

To develop your hook punch has no conflict with your jab, cross development.

From whence come these blasphemies that you speak???!!

[YouKnowWho]

From whence come these blasphemies that you speak???!!

To protect your center from outside in has no conflict with to protect your center from inside out. Even if that may be a foreign concept for some WC systems, If you don't include that, you will never be able to open that "grappling" door.

[Kellen Bassette]

If you don't include that, you will never be able to open that "grappling" door.

If you fear grappling, you will never beat the grappler. You must confront your fear or your training is for naught....