Originally Posted by
sanjuro_ronin
The only ones that didn't get it dude are the ones that spend all their time SAYING and THINKING and very little actually DOING.
The sad part is that I still love WC, I still use quite a bit of it and it served me well when I transitioned over to SPM.
And I am not alone on this.
WC is an excellent system, it is simple, concise and effective.
Because it is heavily specialized the "secret" to making it work ( IE: you can fight ANYONE with it, not just other WC people) is that you must cross-test it VS other systems that do NOT have the same body-movement patterns.
Doing WC VS VC will make you good at, *gasp*, fighting WC.
The carryover VS other systems is harder compared to say MT or Hung Kuen for example, is that those two have a more "natural" way of fighting while WC, as I have mentioned before, is more specialized.
It's not just WC by the way, SPM, Dragons fist, Pak Mei, most of the southern "hands" have that "problem".
Of course that problem is also it's biggest advantage because since the southern hand fighter is bringing something different to the fight, he MAY have the advantage.
ANYONE that has done more than ONE MA knows how much even dissimilar systems have in common at their core.
The body moves the way the body moves and, baring some minor adjustments, it isn't really that complicated.
I will say this to anyone though:
The proof of ANY MA is in fighting, period.
Not co-operative fighting, not "student fighting teacher mode", no, fighting someone that wants to knock your block off.
You can express to your students in whatever way you feel tickles your fancy and you can believe that is the best way for them to learn, BUT the only way to know IF they have learned and how well is to see them fight.
The most effective systems of unarmed combat ( in terms of not only producing fighters but proving themselves) has shown that there is NO NEED for any gibberish in teaching.
And to make clear a point that seems to be getting confused over and over:
You do NOT use bio-mechanical terms ( though terms like leverage and such are common place), you use your understanding of bio-mechanics and such to explain things SIMPLY.
No one is saying that you can't use analogies like a "bow" or "bullet" or "whip" ( a common one also), I am saying there there is no need for overly exotic silliness.