Defeating wing chun

[glenn richards]

Hi VB
Being a fellow Sydney sider i'm interested in who you trained with in WC.
Incidentally, im in agreeance with most of the previous posts... it does sound like your training partner "chases hands"
regards
Glenn

[Void Boxing]

Sifu Joe Molnars students - they trained under grandmaster.

Sydney um, do you train with rick spain?....

Note: The training partners are not that great, i dont get to spar with the good training partners because they are too busy getting beginners up to scratch.

[anerlich]

Sydney um, do you train with rick spain?....

Glenn doesn't, but I do.

Sifu Joe Molnars students - they trained under grandmaster.

Haven't heard of him, which is not to say he's no good. Grandmaster who?

The pracitioner expects you to just throw a punch or a kick, he expects to parry and strike at the same time. When you feint deeply into their guard they try to gain contact to use chi sao.

I'm not expecting you to "just throw a punch or kick". I'm expecting to hit you or take you down as or before you try to get a shot off. I call this the PDA, or "preemptive direct attack"

.

Tonight i discovered that you can make a wing chun practitioner parry themselves and you can confuse their chi sao with varying degrees of tension in your arms. You can make you arm go tense and jerk forward to make them react and then you can disengage their arm swiftly to score with SA - simple attack. You can decieve their parries with a deep attack that suddenly changes and hits on another line i.e straight palm strike to the face feint, change angle and hit with an angulated attack combined with angle footwork.

That's good, but really none of these are earthshattering revelations. Most people who spar and chi sao regularly, especially with people MORE SKILLED THAN THEY (caps intentional) have worked these things out for themselves.

Seriously, if the people you work out with are this predictable, you need to look further afield for more challenging training partners. You haven't found a way to defeat WC, you've found a way to beat up less experienced practitioners.

[namron]

Originally posted by Void Boxing
Sifu Joe Molnars students - they trained under grandmaster.

Sydney um, do you train with rick spain?....

Note: The training partners are not that great, i dont get to spar with the good training partners because they are too busy getting beginners up to scratch.

Have you tried this tactic with sifu Joe Molnar? He sticks a lot closer and through personal experience is direct.

Was that at the Knox branch?

[Snake n Crane]

LOL, Pity I found this many years too late. I know Mr. Void Boxing. he is, was and will always be a delutional person. He trained with Sifu joe just the once and got his ribs busted for the effort. Despite his talk all he ever did was overthink and under support his theories. Waste of time. Most of Void Boxing was delutional drivel and the bits that weren't were stolen directily from the people around him except he got it all wrong.

One man's frustration at the world is not another man's working MA.

[k gledhill]

Through my nine years of training in JKD and wing chun, ive found the most valuable tactic to dealing with a wing chun practitioner is the PIA tactic or progressive indirect attack. ??? Here is why. The pracitioner expects you to just throw a punch or a kick, he expects to parry and strike at the same time. When you feint deeply into their guard they try to gain contact to use chi sao. When you understand this you can decieve both the chi sao and the parries.

Tonight i discovered that you can make a wing chun practitioner parry themselves and you can confuse their chi sao with varying degrees of tension in your arms. You can make you arm go tense and jerk forward to make them react and then you can disengage their arm swiftly to score with SA - simple attack. You can decieve their parries with a deep attack that suddenly changes and hits on another line i.e straight palm strike to the face feint, change angle and hit with an angulated attack combined with angle footwork.

This worked because i almost knocked my mate out whilst playing with him. Hope you find this useful, i sure do.

WSL training uses feinting as a primary method to show chasing, we feint each other constantly during training, in chi-sao , sparring etc... to rid ourselves of the bad habit.

Its a common tool in our class ...alignment of cycling jum & tan strikes is accomplished by a student knowing that the arms arent what we attack We dont seek to control arms unless the arms allow it...meaning we hit first trap later, always trying to hit with free hands, being the attacker.
It is when the student wants to seek the hand to control, that you begin to control them wow that was deep

you can do takedowns easily too for students who chase your high feints while pivoting in one spot.

[SAAMAG]

We dont seek to control arms unless the arms allow it...meaning we hit first trap later, always trying to hit with free hands, being the attacker.

Good post. That's the way I thought all wing chun people train to do it.

It's a simple equation really. Guy has intention of attacking, you hit first, if that attack finds resistance, you remove that resistance and continue the attack. Simple. Don't chase hands, aim for center mass, continue until center mass is jello.

Style aside...feinting is a good skill to have and use in general. It is something that can be as minute as a shift of the weight, a twitch of the shoulder, even a look of the eyes. It helps to shed light on what your opponent will do, how acute their perception is, and whether or not they'll attack you anyway even on a deep feint (wing chun ).

With a deep feint though--I consider those to be moreso what I call uncommitted attacks because if the DF gets no reaction I'm going to go ahead and hit them. If it does get the expected reaction, I am ready to react to the counter anyway in order to get to my intented target.

E.G. a simple direct attack is usually countered or at least defended by any fighter who is aware of things and has some experience, even if the timing was right and you hit in the half beat and so forth. At least, I wouldn't underestimate someone with it. I stay wary of the counter for a SDA because of the fact that its got no setup (outside of timing) and isn't part of a combination. If it hits, great! It if doesn't it becomes part the catalyst for a PIA and will eventually find its mark (hopefully )

[k gledhill]

When fighting in bars 'n' streets I rarely used a parry , just facing strikes with movement to the attackers movements...pak to trap is common if a guy over-swings...usually a strike, palm to head, fist to jaw / head, kicks ...simple stuff .
The jaw is fragile ...I worked with a guy from Newcastle who would either insult your mother or offer you a cigarette just to get you to open your jaw a little before punching you to the side of the lower jaw, now opened up a little...ko every time

[SAAMAG]

When fighting in bars 'n' streets I rarely used a parry , just facing strikes with movement to the attackers movements...pak to trap is common if a guy over-swings...usually a strike, palm to head, fist to jaw / head, kicks ...simple stuff .
The jaw is fragile ...I worked with a guy from Newcastle who would either insult your mother or offer you a cigarette just to get you to open your jaw a little before punching you to the side of the lower jaw, now opened up a little...ko every time

Yep...you never want to get punched with your mouth even slightly open. Bad stuff for sure. I've always preferred to use the actual punch as the primary way to deflect and counter attacks. It just seems...smarter. Why do it in three counts when you can do it all in one? Then again, you can always evade and punch at the same time as also...which I like equally well. Nothing like ducking under a punch while jamming them in the solar plexus at the same time.

[YungChun]

I never relied on blocking.......

Blocking is something I hoped my opponent would do..

Terence is correct when he talks about being behind the timing with a block.

And I never developed the ability to do the block/strike under high pressure...though I still think it may be worth working on more than I did.

If the opponent fakes (not feints) then if he is in range I attack.. I prefer to stay in an attack mode, or working on getting into attack mode at all times.

[k gledhill]

the strength of the vt idea is to simply attack regardless of what is put before you..feint and your still striking on the same line, intercept and your still attacking etc....alignment drills start in dan chi-sao..elbows in not wrists dropping on tans etc... the parries/blocks of vt are the strikes at the basic level....the natural angles from slt etc..and drills ingrain a method of striking that has the simultaneous strike / deflect angles with tactical X angling movement ...the cycling striking arms naturally intersect anything coming towards your centerline...nothing stopping the strikes and your simply hitting when the hands are free....staying with the guy as he moves around avoiding your constant ability to attack...

the techniques of the vt system allow the ability to have an attacking action with every move...no 2 defensive actions follow another...er shouldnt anyway

as for the opponent blocking..I have found in fights that hitting the guy is the easiest part, it comes down to standing firm allowing them to come at you, then hit them but 'what with' , who's first , ie fingers, fist or elbows as they come at me, distances , height of head/s....ground level after punching ; ) for follow up kick to head ,......low front midsection kicks for those moments you want pick guys up off their feet and slam them into walls ...then kick them in the head on the ground so they dont get up too quickly ...trying to avoid teeth marks in your feet.
Or vertical palms to head down charges...makes them grab their heads with both hands like instant migraine...
I personally found a lot of guys will grab my lead wrists as they try to control with common untrained actions, 'the leading left arm grab followed by the big right' , like a leading lop sao bad idea, takes the hand out of the fight....making an easy thing from chi-sao , turning them reversing the charge into me and slamming them into objects, walls, cars, tables or down a flight of stairs....asa they grab my hands i get calm like a chi-sao match and let them get on with it ...you know they cant hit you until they let go ....and as soon as they do... your hand is free.

[SAAMAG]

If the opponent fakes (not feints) then if he is in range I attack...

Realizing that a lot of the internet banter comes from varying semantics--for clarification purposes--what is your definition of a "fake" and a "feint"? How do they differ for you?

I ask this because I use the term "feint" for any motion that implies a false attack. Regardless of whether its something as simple as leading with the eyes, or as pronounced as deeply faking a punch through someone's guard.

[YungChun]

Realizing that a lot of the internet banter comes from varying semantics--for clarification purposes--what is your definition of a "fake" and a "feint"? How do they differ for you?

I ask this because I use the term "feint" for any motion that implies a false attack. Regardless of whether its something as simple as leading with the eyes, or as pronounced as deeply faking a punch through someone's guard.

A feint is nothing in particular, could be a sudden head/body twitch, eyes as you said, assisting....

Feint is a French term that entered English from the discipline of fencing. Feints are maneuvers designed to distract or mislead, done by giving the impression that a certain maneuver will take place, while in fact another, or even none, will.

While a fake is an action like a Progressive Indirect Attack.. Or other action that is designed to lead the defense, into typically a parry/block.. It involves the user executing some part of an attacking motion designed to convince the defense of a particular action/target, which can then be easily changed to another--also used to close the gap...

The WCK way as I know it simplifies all of these things into a simple question of if I can now attack...

[mjw]

Chase the man, not the hand.....

[SAAMAG]

A feint is nothing in particular, could be a sudden head/body twitch, eyes as you said, assisting....

That's pretty much how I see it...though the english term "fake" reads the same. In fact the word "feint" is even used as part of the definition of "fake":

Having a false or misleading appearance; fraudulent.
n.
1. One that is not authentic or genuine; a sham.
2. Sports A brief feint or aborted change of direction intended to mislead one's opponent or the opposing team.

While a fake is an action like a Progressive Indirect Attack.. Or other action that is designed to lead the defense, into typically a parry/block.. It involves the user executing some part of an attacking motion designed to convince the defense of a particular action/target, which can then be easily changed to another--also used to close the gap...

The WCK way as I know it simplifies all of these things into a simple question of if I can now attack...

See...I consider this more like drawing or luring the opponent. Where you leave an area open to entice the opponent to attack that spot, OR you could take an action to draw out a desired reaction from your opponent. My personal use of the PIA was such that it is a natural progression from a simple direct attack when the fist attack is countered. I realize that the majority of people will say you lead the PIA with a feint, but I figure that there's no reason not to make the first attack a real one. If it's countered, then you naturally move into something else. You attack, it's blocked, parried, whatever...then you go into the "trapping" phase to give way to another attack. Note that this is indeed different than a combination where the original intent was to attack in a predetermined sequence.

But...we all have our own interpretations of JKD...which is the beauty of it. Nothing set in stone and these are just concepts after all. You can name them whatever you want really. (Yea...I said it...CONCEPTS. Sorry T'!)