Time to settle yjkym to get result and to move on
http://youtu.be/WbqlC15P0uE
Registered User
Time to settle yjkym to get result and to move on
http://youtu.be/WbqlC15P0uE
Registered User
The argument seems to be based on several misconceptions about the training method of VTOriginally Posted by Hendrik
Registered User
Thanks, but what you seem incapable of understanding is that some of us are just fine with our methods and are 'getting results' and 'moving on' just fine without you.
Registered User
Or you miss the point I have made ?
please share with us your yjkym practice what result do you get from it
Registered User
That wouldn't be surprising; your point is usually hard or impossible to decipher.
The main problem is that you need to understand the thing you are criticising in order to make valid criticism. It appears that you don't understand VT, therefore your criticisms are based upon misconceptions and are unconvincing. I think you know this, which is why you often ask for something to parody and attack. Again as an approach it isn't doing much to advertise whatever it is that you are offering.please share with us your yjkym practice what result do you get from it
I think most people can see that you have something against standard VT, that you don't understand standard VT (or make dishonest mischaracterisations), and that it is impossible to know what it is you are offering as an alternative. This isn't a particularly tempting offer for the average person already happy with the VT system.
Last edited by guy b.; 04-23-2016 at 09:03 AM.
Registered User
The main problem is that you need to understand the thing you are criticising in order to make valid criticism. ------
or you have no idea what is my point.
It appears that you don't understand VT, therefore your criticisms are based upon misconceptions and are unconvincing. -------
That is your opinion. based on your subjective using yourself as the standard reference.
I think you know this, which is why you often ask for something to parody and attack. Again as an approach it isn't doing much to advertise whatever it is that you are offering. ------
or I am solving the issue instead of taking non function dogma.
I think most people can see that you have something against standard VT, that you don't understand standard VT (or make dishonest mischaracterisations), and that it is impossible to know what it is you are offering as an alternative. This isn't a particularly tempting offer for the average person already happy with the VT system.------
again, you are subjectively put yourself as standard VT.
obviously, you ignore human biomechanics and law of physics and keep using yourself as the standard
Show us here what is a working YJKYM and what is the benefit of it, that is much beneficial instead of getting into subjective religious type of judgmental argument which is non realistic
Registered User
Awesome. We could go on forever like this.
Registered User
I would like to hear people's comments on that too. IMO, the YJKYM has the following issues:
1. body lean back - give your opponent a chance for "cut" (hook your leg forward while pushing your upper body back),
2. chest/groin facing forward - expose too much area for your opponent to attack,
3. knees too close - prevent freedom of movement, give your opponent a chance for "double legs",
4. knee bend inward - give your opponent a chance for "stomp" behind the knee joint,
5. base too narrow - give your opponent a chance for "sweep",
6. ...
I'm glad that finally someone starts to address these issues. I like the following clip that you have put up. It's so much comfortable to see a body posture as you did (at 5.45 - 5.55) that doesn't lean back and doesn't locked. I do believe the lean back and body locked YJKYM is a bad way. Whoever had created that was wrong.
Last edited by YouKnowWho; 04-23-2016 at 01:13 PM.
http://johnswang.com
More opinion -> more argument
Less opinion -> less argument
No opinion -> no argument
Registered User
(1) So would I, but there is no discussing this (or anything else) with HS...he thinks we are all too ignorant to grasp his holier-than-thou wisdom. And, anyone who comes close, is either invoking mysticism, and/or "doesn't have his facts straight", and/or ignoring physics, and/or not acknowledging human bio-mechanics, and/or....blah blah blah.
(2) I agree, these may be issues...but addressing them as HS does is an exercise in futility given his lack of understanding of the greater WC/VT/WT community.
(3) I agree with Guy on HS's clips... way too long and chalk full of minutia. He could say what he needs to much more efficiently.
(4) Some lineages don't do the things you and HS mention... but again, to HS viewpoint...he is the only one who knows what "right" looks like.
(5) Leaning back: some do, some don't. Personally, I agree...leaning back does not make sense to me. But, I don't make video after video trying to force my opinion onto the world (through brainless repetition of said same videos)
(6) Don't know who created it. The only lineage I see leaning way back is Moy Yat lineage.
Registered User
Your list of issues seems to be based upon the idea that YJKYM is a fighting stance. Not much I can really say to that.IMO, the YJKYM has the following issues
Registered User
Why are you making hundreds of videos that nobody can understand? Seems insane.
When you fail to touch even a single common point of reference in your clips, then there is no need to respond with detailed discussion of biomechanics. You don't even appear to be talking about VT.Show us here what is a working YJKYM and what is the benefit of it, that is much beneficial
Last edited by guy b.; 04-23-2016 at 11:26 PM.
Registered User
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1293109]I would like to hear people's comments on that too. IMO, the YJKYM has the following issues:
1. body lean back - give your opponent a chance for "cut" (hook your leg forward while pushing your upper body back),
2. chest/groin facing forward - expose too much area for your opponent to attack,
3. knees too close - prevent freedom of movement, give your opponent a chance for "double legs",
4. knee bend inward - give your opponent a chance for "stomp" behind the knee joint,
5. base too narrow - give your opponent a chance for "sweep",
6. ...
I'm glad that finally someone starts to address these issues.
John,
As you know, reality in fighting is there is no way those type as you address above capable to take momentum impact. It is a broken momentum posture （败勢）, how is that type of body going to handle a strong opponent with good momentum handling? Those stuffs can be predicted to be fall a part at first contact.
You can see how weak is this type of yjkym in this YouTube example. Observe the lower body, practically this wcner doesn't have basic development from hip down. That's why I propose to do air squat and torque as in the above video I have post. Otherwise, it is a dead end while everyone can keep believe some days they can become invincible by practicing the yjkym as you state above.
http://youtu.be/qAN-ZKQlucg
Registered User
You always says wck is a fighting art, so, why wasting time practicing yjkym since it is nothing to do with fighting?
Registered User
It is strange isn't it? Why the sifu like John and other mma players know my point and you don't
Registered User
A lot of systems have a slightly leaning ready position. Bare knuckle boxing, old Muay Thai, Karate... Obviously many people thought it to be useful. Maybe it is because self defense is more about infighting? And if you have an opponent unexpectedly coming for you without going to the ground and start wrestling, chances are high you are forced into a back leaning position.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote