Page 20 of 32 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 479

Thread: Best Wing Chun KO in MMA - Iron Wolves Fighter Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun

  1. #286
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    This picture shows Man Wu structure in a forward stance. Not comparable to Alan's guys keeping both fists up by the side of their heads, centerline open.
    The mun wu structure is a model. If you stand like that you will get murdered by anyone who can box. Ten minutes sparring will show you that folly. That said what the model teaches is sound.

    Let's assume that you can make it work though. Just because you can doesn't mean everyone can or should.

    The test for your wing chun like in boxing is not in how close you look like the model but the level you can perform at.

    I'll bet that if you spent time sparring with someone throwing mostly solid hooks and swings your hands will naturally go to where they need to be and that will be to cover.

    You seem stuck on we are taught to put our hands in the mun wu and to occupy the centerline. Yes. As beginners. So that you become aware of the line and how to use it. Just as boxing beginners are taught to keep their hands up in guard. That is taught as the model for a reason also. They are not restricted to the model though. As they develop their hands will not be set.

    The model is not application.

  2. #287
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    44
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by tc101 View Post
    The mun wu structure is a model. If you stand like that you will get murdered by anyone who can box. Ten minutes sparring will show you that folly. That said what the model teaches is sound.

    Let's assume that you can make it work though. Just because you can doesn't mean everyone can or should.

    The test for your wing chun like in boxing is not in how close you look like the model but the level you can perform at.

    I'll bet that if you spent time sparring with someone throwing mostly solid hooks and swings your hands will naturally go to where they need to be and that will be to cover.

    You seem stuck on we are taught to put our hands in the mun wu and to occupy the centerline. Yes. As beginners. So that you become aware of the line and how to use it. Just as boxing beginners are taught to keep their hands up in guard. That is taught as the model for a reason also. They are not restricted to the model though. As they develop their hands will not be set.

    The model is not application.
    Nice and succinct

  3. #288
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    Relevant interview excerpt with WSL:

    Q: Are you a traditionalist?
    A: I firmly believe that Wing Chun is something very logical. As long as it stays logical it doesn’t matter what you call it or what you’re actually doing. If it is logical, if it works, use it! Make the art your slave, and never allow the art be your master.

  4. #289
    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    Your fixation on the minutiae of what we are doing wrong when using our method in combat is getting very boring.
    Again, I am NOT talking about you doing something wrong, I am asking how these things fit into your Wing Chun - as they don't seem to me to be found in other lines, so I ask how it fits into you conceptual system, and I ask where this comes from (from Robert's various influences). I have no idea why you can't see that.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    We have been more than accomodating with your anally retentive questioning.
    You say accommodating but neither you nor Alan have answered the questions asked, and Alan even said he wouldn't waste his time on them. That is accommodating by what definition?

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    You can't expect people to keep going out of their way posting clips and replying to your questions when you give nothing back.
    I'm not asking anyone to post clips. I am asking questions and they are not being answered. That's your right (to not answer them), but you keep saying you are answering them. If you haven't, I've asked again.

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    The more you post the more you sound like an armchair quarterback who's never really tested his skills. Supply a clip then we can see where we are going wrong. I have a sneaky suspicion though that if you did supply a clip you wouldn't like the constructive criticism it might receive...
    I already told you (twice at least) that the sparring I do (most of it is not with fellow Wing Tsunners) is not recorded - and as far as know those guys have no intention of recording what we do. That's fine with me, as I couldn't care less about recording it either. But for that very reason I have not asked you, or Alan, to supply more clips. All I have done is asked some questions. KPM asked similar questions too. You don't have to answer them if you don't want to. But in that case I don't understand why you are here.

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    This is the sort of observation beginners make
    You know, not too long ago we had similar statements ("you're beginners", "low level", "not understanding", etc) from a PBVT guy. It's really not constructive or accurate. You say I don't accept anything outside of the system I train (absolutely not true) but then you make statements that show if someone asks you something you don't like, or something you won't answer, you stay within your own box and resort to name calling. Considering both you and Alan teach, it's a little strange.

    Quote Originally Posted by tc101 View Post
    The mun wu structure is a model. If you stand like that you will get murdered by anyone who can box. Ten minutes sparring will show you that folly. That said what the model teaches is sound.
    I never once advocated that someone should stand in/keep Man Sau Wu Sau for 10 minutes. The point I was trying to make is that model (and what it is teaching regarding elbow position, gates, centre line, etc) are not consistent with someone holding both fists at the side of their head - which is why I asked why the CSL WCK guys were doing it. How does it fit into their conceptual framework?

    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    Wing Chun can only be applied from the one cooker cutter guard?
    Where did I say that?
    Last edited by BPWT..; 04-24-2014 at 07:05 AM.

  5. #290
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    Relevant interview excerpt with WSL:

    Q: Are you a traditionalist?
    A: I firmly believe that Wing Chun is something very logical. As long as it stays logical it doesn’t matter what you call it or what you’re actually doing. If it is logical, if it works, use it! Make the art your slave, and never allow the art be your master.
    It's a great quote. But to determine if something is logical, a pretty standard test is to study the principles and/or methods to see if something is correct or not.
    You can't do this without, first, asking some questions. So I ask questions. And people tell me they won't waste their time answering them. In short, WSL talks about not being a slave 'to' the art, but for 'you' to be its master.

    If you can show me a quote where WSL says don't ask questions, and, more specifically, that people shouldn't answer them... then we can talk about Wing Chun and logic.
    Last edited by BPWT..; 04-24-2014 at 07:28 AM.

  6. #291
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    That could actually be her real name. BPWT = Beatrice P. who does Wing Tsun.
    B for Buda, P for Pest.

    She is a He, though I'm happy to camp it up if people get more satisfaction out of naming calling to women.

  7. #292
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    Wasn't meant to be a comparison, just saying people make uninformed criticisms all the time. But why would it matter?

    What is the problem with them guarding like that? Wing Chun can only be applied from the one cooker cutter guard? We don't necessarily have to occupy the centerline in order to control or defend it. It's not a fighting style, but a fighting skill.
    Just to add, in the HFI history thread, I posted:

    "The pic I posted is fairly old, from Leung Ting's Wing Tsun Kuen book published in 1978. It is okay for what it is, but doesn't show 'depth' for the viewer, so doesn't show how in, for example, a Man Sau + Wu Sau, we'd also define two ranges (in Man Sau: hand to elbow; and in Wu Sau: hand to shoulder). But it gives a general idea."

    So no, of course Man/Wu isn't or shouldn't be one cookie cutter guard, but the guard (however it is formed) is best (IMO) if it can monitor the two ranges, the gates, and incorporate good elbow position. For sure there are variations and options.

    But I asked about the CSL guys using the two fists by the head as it wouldn't fit with the above idea - so I was asking what, in their line, it does fit with (and, as always, where it comes from - as a point of reference for their system).

  8. #293
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ
    Wing Chun can only be applied from the one cooker cutter guard?
    Where did I say that?
    I don't see what the gripe is then. Wing Chun can be used from any guard. You do what keeps your head on.

    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    It's a great quote. But to determine if something is logical, a pretty standard test is to study the principles and/or methods to see if something is correct or not.
    No. That's just theory. If you do live sparring and fight, you will know very quickly what is logical and what is not.

    In short, WSL talks about not making the art 'your' slave, but for 'you' to be its master
    What do you think that means?

  9. #294
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    But I asked about the CSL guys using the two fists by the head as it wouldn't fit with the above idea - so I was asking what, in their line, it does fit with (and, as always, where it comes from - as a point of reference for their system).
    In one of Alan's DVDs he shows covering the head with both hands to guard against large overhead or round strikes. It's the mainly emergency action found in the BJ form. It can be applied as a guard with many useful offensive or defensive possibilities and fits perfectly with their Wing Chun fighting strategy, where they won't just be facing other WC-type attacks.

  10. #295
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    In one of Alan's DVDs he shows covering the head with both hands to guard against large overhead or round strikes. It's the mainly emergency action found in the BJ form. It can be applied as a guard with many useful offensive or defensive possibilities and fits perfectly with their Wing Chun fighting strategy, where they won't just be facing other WC-type attacks.
    Perfect. That's exactly what I was looking for. A description and how it would fit into their framework. Our BT approach is not quite the same, but it doesn't matter as, like I said, I've approached this saying I wanted to know the 'why's'.

    My only complaint is that this description of the CSL approach came from someone outside of their lineage, when one of their line's main guys has actually been posting here.

    Still, an answer is better than no answer. So thank you, LFJ.

  11. #296
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    For BPWT. Have a look at the type of guarding he does here. Still Wing Chun, I would say.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj9mTuia70A

  12. #297
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    44
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    Perfect. That's exactly what I was looking for. A description and how it would fit into their framework. Our BT approach is not quite the same, but it doesn't matter as, like I said, I've approached this saying I wanted to know the 'why's'.

    My only complaint is that this description of the CSL approach came from someone outside of their lineage, when one of their line's main guys has actually been posting here.

    Still, an answer is better than no answer. So thank you, LFJ.
    Your tone is pretty insulting. You're implying that we can't explain our own system. I chose not to reply because I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you. You're happy now because LFJ's explanation makes sense to you but only because it fits with your understanding. Ok, I'll bite, where the hands are held in a pre-fight/guard posture is always going to be based on personal preference and on what I need to do in that moment of time.

    If I'm suddenly under a barrage I may feel the need to utilise a covering strategy before being able to extend my bridges/structure into my opponent. The idea of a fixed static guard is nonsensical to me, I will always be moving,enticing and enquiring (these are some of our methods you so kindly pointed out about 100 pages ago). I'm not thinking "better use double prayer hand from Bil jee) I use the mechanics/methods that seem appropriate to me at that point in time. Experience will often dictate my choices here not logic and theory. Don't be so fixated on guard positions, what truly matters is what happens when the hands start flying. We seem to do ok at that point.

  13. #298
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    In one of Alan's DVDs he shows covering the head with both hands to guard against large overhead or round strikes. It's the mainly emergency action found in the BJ form. It can be applied as a guard with many useful offensive or defensive possibilities and fits perfectly with their Wing Chun fighting strategy, where they won't just be facing other WC-type attacks.
    First, I'm not critiquing what Alan or his guys do with this comment - what anyone else does has no bearing on my understanding of wing chun and if it works for them, more power to them

    That said, you bring up a good point - that this is mainly an emergency action found in BJ from a WC perspective. So IMO, this is really a last ditch recovery effort we use mainly because someone got into our space, we lost structure and/or facing and we have no options left, not a WC bai jong ready stance - regardless what type of fighter we are facing. Sure, people can fight from any position they chose. But fighting from a stance where both hands are held in close to the body/chin, you lose a lot of your ability to apply some very key basic wing chun fighting principles.
    First, you have no 2 lines or offence/defense and you lose ability to occupy space on center which is essential to WC's Jeet Kiu ideas or applying WC's gate theories for defense (4-gate) or bridging engagement strategies (6 gate). Also, you're are giving up range and timing which you'll just have to recover. Basically, you're putting yourself in a recovery timeframe right from the start. While you can fight from this stance easily enough, and many arts do - doing so it makes it quite a bit harder to apply WC's engagement & bridging strategies from a wing chun SNT concept/principle perspective.

    I'm not saying someone should just stand around like a 'mo with your hands in a static bai jong ready stance either. But from a wing chun principle perspective, BJ emergency/recovery methods are the last place I want to be, not a position to start from.
    Last edited by JPinAZ; 04-24-2014 at 09:08 AM.
    What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90

  14. #299
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    For BPWT. Have a look at the type of guarding he does here. Still Wing Chun, I would say.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj9mTuia70A
    Yes, I wouldn't argue that this isn't Wing Chun. And in close this is how things often look. So I don't have an issue with problem solving in this way. In that case, what fits with their system would also fit in mine. In Lat Sau this type of scenario is often found.

    But here's where I see what would lead me to ask a question. and yes, I'm aware that this will be met with derision from Chris.

    I would ask how this form of covering (if we call it that for convenience) would be a good Wing Chun strategy as a starting point? I understand that when a punch is thrown and you've moved in, this is a possible outcome. But why would you use this covering position before a strike is thrown?

    This is why I asked the question regarding the 'light sparring clip' from Alan. One of the fighters often held this position before facing an attack. Now I'm not saying it is wrong (for fear of all Hell's wrath coming down on me), and maybe for a boxer it might absolutely be right... but I am instead asking what is the CSL WC strategy for having, essentially, the arms compressed in this position before something has happened?

    Why, for example, have this position as opposed to using something that approximates more the Man and Wu 'structure' that gives better coverage (gates and centre line) and puts your weapons a little closer to the target?

    From the structure I'm talking about (and it can come in various shapes and sizes, if you like, I'm not necessarily talking about a text book Man Sau and Wu) it can still compress if the punch (say that whipping punch) comes in, and can still be used even if your timing happened to be a little bit late (which is often the case when sparring, IMO).

  15. #300
    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    Your tone is pretty insulting. You're implying that we can't explain our own system.
    Look, I'm sure you're not truly wounded by this debate/argument/discussion. But if someone refuses to give more details it can only be because a) they can't be arsed (so why come here), b) they can't.

    Believe me, if you find this insulting you should read some of the exchanges I had with Graham H. This is buddies chatting in a pub compared to those crazy days.

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    I chose not to reply because I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you.
    To quote a Morrissey lyric, then you should maybe "get off the stage."

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    You're happy now because LFJ's explanation makes sense to you but only because it fits with your understanding.
    I'm "happy" because LFJ made the effort to answer - even though he's not from your lineage. Which, let's be honest, is more than you did. Does it fit my understanding (in terms of what I learn)? Not exactly - we wouldn't use this idea and/or motion from BT in exactly the same way. But I am willing to concede that you guys do, and so now I know a little more (have a slightly better understanding) of what you're saying (or not saying).


    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    Ok, I'll bite, where the hands are held in a pre-fight/guard posture is always going to be based on personal preference and on what I need to do in that moment of time.
    Thanks - this relates to my post just before this one. When you say 'that moment in time' and you're talking about a pre-fight/guard, I asked why you would assume a covering position before an attack. Again, just trying to understand your system's thinking.

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    If I'm suddenly under a barrage I may feel the need to utilise a covering strategy before being able to extend my bridges/structure into my opponent.
    I agree, if under a barrage this might be a solution - I agreed above, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by chris bougeard View Post
    The idea of a fixed static guard is nonsensical to me, I will always be moving,enticing and enquiring (these are some of our methods you so kindly pointed out about 100 pages ago)
    I agree. It is only static until it acts (no one holds it out and doesn't change/react to what happens next). But as a starting point, it has some strong/positive attributes. IMO, more so than starting from a covering position. If your opinion is different, that's cool - but please explain why.
    Last edited by BPWT..; 04-24-2014 at 09:18 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •