If my WCK is good then I won't be taken down... [Archive]

t_niehoff

07-29-2007, 08:36 PM

His takedown defense *was* pretty poor but the rest of his game was OK IMO.

First of all, I agree with you that both deserve props for getting in there.

That said, when I look at the stand up skills of the WCK fighter, I wouldn't call it "OK", just the opposite. Besides being taken down just about at will by his opponent -- which is not just a matter of his "takedown defense" but also in how he is moving -- the WCK guy really didn't have much in the way of offensive skills, not helped by his maintaining "the wing chun guard" (which only limits your offense), he kept doing the silly TWC entry-hop-thingy, and really didn't seem to have much going for him - certainly not a good game plan. Moreover, I really didn't see much WC, even TWC, other than the dancing around in the "wing chun guard" and the hopping-entry. All I saw was poor kickboxing.

If people want to kickbox, they would be wise to do something besides WCK, perhaps something that has proved to be a really good kickboxing method (cough, muay thai, cough).

He was never in real trouble on the ground, and some of what he was doing was reasonably sound, controlling the arms, pulling guard when the takedown was on, etc.; and when the MMA guy did fall over his ground defense was IMO no better and arguably worse.

The MMA fighter -- a wrestler according to the video caption -- did give up position too much (going for subs as Dale pointed out). And he didn't have a very good stand-up game either. That said, he dominated the WCK guy. Not really surprising when you train a bunch of stuff that you can just never make work.

Both of these guys are young kids. I am sure both learned a lot from this bout. Props to both for mixing it up.

I think this was just a fairly informal bout in a gym somewhere. Most sanctioned events allow you to wear shoes or kick, but not both.

These sorts of things can be instructive for everyone - provided they look at them critically.

And what most other people have said for years too.

Well, certainly not WCK people. ;)

YungChun

07-30-2007, 12:12 AM

"the wing chun guard" (which only limits your offense)

Are we talking about Jong Sao?

Please elaborate...on why and what...

anerlich

07-30-2007, 02:09 AM

he kept doing the silly TWC entry-hop-thingy

You are ignorant on this subject, but as usual that doesn't stop you from blathering on at length.

The principles of the TWC entry technique and MT "compound defense" are actually pretty much the same. And it's NOT A ******* HOP!

And yes, it all comes down to training methods.

And BTW, MT specialists who don't practice takedown defense don't necessarily fare any better than anyone else without those skills. John Wayne Parr got taken down and beaten in about 20 seconds by Tony Bonello here a while ago. JWP is an elite Muay Thai fighter, but ...

Liddel

07-30-2007, 03:02 AM

If he learned anything - when he fights another wrestler we should expect him to not be so greedy and reckless with his punches.

He looked to not have good control of his range, rather just bursting in haphazard which gave rize to the takedown....

While you might like to dog on the guy/s for whatever, we dont really know if this is day two or year two of training for these guys so.....

Talk technique all you want......

YungChun

07-30-2007, 03:20 AM

If he learned anything - when he fights another wrestler we should expect him to not be so greedy and reckless with his punches.

He looked to not have good control of his range, rather just bursting in haphazard which gave rize to the takedown....

Agreed..

Entry should be measured and cautious, especially in a match; we need to be keenly aware of the range and position of ourselves and the opponent... Actually, leaping into range isn't a good idea or really what the "method" :cool: is all about....

When we do enter we need to take his balance and hurt him relentlessly...

drleungjohn

07-30-2007, 09:35 AM

You can clearly tell it's a Cheung school-the only thing I will comment on is that many times the TWC entry wasn't done at the correct angle to maintain the outside line

But nice for 2 16 year old kids and nicer that the school trains somewhat realistically against grapplers

-And you will be seeing more of this Andrew "Chu" kid--

YungChun

07-30-2007, 01:38 PM

Lifting the lead knee like that and skipping, hopping, sliding in, however one does it certainly is not limited to TWC and is something that is common among folks who fight kickers.. I used to do this often when crossing that line with kickers, assuming I wasn’t kicking myself, to jam and enter into hand range. It can work well depending on the timing and distance used but not something that should be done all the time.. For example I would NOT use this unless absolutely necessary when fighting a grappler or against someone who may grapple, and I would use kicks sparingly against same as kicking to enter on grapplers just gives them a nice big handle to catch..

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 04:02 PM

Are we talking about Jong Sao?

Please elaborate...on why and what...

"Jong sao"? Is that what *you* call it?

Extending an arm away from the body and holding it there in some "ready stance" like this guy (and many WCK people do) is generally a mistake in fighting -- it limits the things you can do both with your arm and body, offensively and defensively. Even for simple, basic things like using your shoulder (or hands) to cover your chin. As you can see from the video, it really didn't serve him and if his opponent had had decent hands, you would have seen why it is a mistake.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 04:21 PM

You are ignorant on this subject, but as usual that doesn't stop you from blathering on at length.

No, I'm not ignorant on this subject, just not brainwashed.

The principles of the TWC entry technique and MT "compound defense" are actually pretty much the same. And it's NOT A ******* HOP!

Oh, please! The "principles" are the last refuge of the TMAs -- "we have the principles". Well, the principles don't matter. For the most part, "principles" are part of the brainwashing. What matters is what you do and how well you do it. Good MT guys don't move like TWC guys, so they are not *doing* the same things. Certainly, they are not "hopping in."

I know you guys say it is not a hop, but when you see it applied, what do you see? A hop (lift a leg and dart forward). LOL! A useless, pointless, hop. One that tells the other guy you are coming, that won't provide any real defense or offense, that certainly will limit what you can do, how you can adjust, etc. Really "brilliant" stuff.

And yes, it all comes down to training methods.

Training methods guided by results. And to be guided by results, we need to critically examine our results, to look with an unbaised eye at how things really are.

And BTW, MT specialists who don't practice takedown defense don't necessarily fare any better than anyone else without those skills. John Wayne Parr got taken down and beaten in about 20 seconds by Tony Bonello here a while ago. JWP is an elite Muay Thai fighter, but ...

I completely agree with you, but that wasn't my point. My point was that if someone wants to kickbox well, then there are better methods than WCK for kickboxing - like MT.

k gledhill

07-30-2007, 04:22 PM

Im in agreement with dr leungjohn & liddel here...both the distance and angles ??
The exercise Seung -ma x Toi -ma in early chisao deals with this very important aspect of developing a natural instinct to angle while maintaining our maximum force relative to an arm/body ...the guy should have delivered body behind a punch at precisely the time he didnt :D
many hit with arms, after the body takes them to their destination [ chisao trains this mistake out] ...when they arrive they arent were they need to be [chisao one checks the stages, angles, elbows in ] , they have gone a stop to far on the train....[ chisao , too close to deliver force....] chisao contains a simple method / process to use the SLT & Chum Kil...not to stick to arms either
let the arms find you while you strike

seung ma x toi ma will cure this...its no guarantee but it isolates the primetime point of maximizing ones ability to attack an attack / punch a punch with both correctly timed leg force behind an extending fist/palm...our inch punches test or 'proves' this point of contact in seung ma toi ma...can you get that inch punch distance but deliver it with 2 ft body mass timing proportionate to your body weight and the speed of the incoming head all in one point ?

I feel like Im saying what WSL said in a quote , chisao isnt to tie your opponent up or learn to stick endlessly to their arms..its how to deliver the force of a combined body arm strike while maintaining a tactical flanking action constantly....aka what to do once you arrive in the guys face / space you dont want to be moving stright in or straight back...wrong thinking to start never mind what a boxer will or might do ...anyone will throw an over arm hook a school kid in the playground will do this, so why do so many vt guys do it "charge" ! like the light brigade, it may be your last...;)

http://www.victorianweb.org/history/crimea/chargelb.html

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 04:29 PM

You can clearly tell it's a Cheung school-the only thing I will comment on is that many times the TWC entry wasn't done at the correct angle to maintain the outside line

But you're not going to be able to "do it at the correct angle" and "maintain the outside line." The other guy will adjust and face you directly - within a split second - *as you move in*. It's not like the demos where the opponent stands there like a statue. Show me one video where someone can use this "entry technique" against someone with decent skills in 100% sparring and maintain the "outside line".

This is a good example of starting with theory and trying to make it work -- it never will, at least not consistently and certainly not against anyone good. If you start with the fight and see what works *as a starting point*, no one would be wasting their time doing this stuff.

But nice for 2 16 year old kids and nicer that the school trains somewhat realistically against grapplers

He did at least as well, if not better, than most grown-ups in WCK would do.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 04:36 PM

canglong

07-30-2007, 04:55 PM

Show me one video where someone can use this "entry technique" against someone with decent skills in 100% sparring and maintain the "outside line". And what you'll argue against some other part of the technique. What good is a video if you can't understand the principle. You want to make this harder than it needs to be the raised leg guards against a kick before moving forward similar to a forward guard hand. If you have seen Tony Jaa raise his knee while practising you have seen the same raised MT knee as TWC so once again Terence you are wrong but nothing new there.

YungChun

07-30-2007, 05:00 PM

But you're not going to be able to "do it at the correct angle" and "maintain the outside line." The other guy will adjust and face you directly - within a split second - *as you move in*
{snip}
This is a good example of starting with theory and trying to make it work -- it never will, at least not consistently and certainly not against anyone good. If you start with the fight and see what works *as a starting point*, no one would be wasting their time doing this stuff.

Moving to the outside is taught in boxing.... I won't bother with why... Suffice it to say it's a sound tactic..

Moving to the outside at the last split second as you attack/counter happens all the time in fighting and in boxing as well--in boxing it's called a slip...

Most standup fighters sooner or later learn to move to the outside when using certain kinds of attacks, like a cross... It's just duh... Nothing so special or theoretcial or exotic about any of this...

And I and many others have used the lifting knee thing to jam kicks on entry, another common tactic, even MT does the lifing knee thing <takoon?> to block/jam kicks, moving in with it is even better to jam, but you don't leap with it...

As for Jong Sao it's neutral position and occupation of the line is useful IMO.. but the hands keep moving...

Ultimatewingchun

07-30-2007, 05:06 PM

The Entry technique does work well against kickers.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 05:16 PM

It does work well against kickers.

There is no such thing as "kickers." Decent fighters don't just kick -- the move, they strike with both hands and feet, they clinch, etc.

But if you think this works against fighters that throw kicks, go visit a MT gym and spar 100% with some decent MT "kickers" and see for yourself. You'll find that if you try to "hop in" their kicks will just knock you down.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 05:29 PM

Moving to the outside is taught in boxing.... I won't bother with why... Suffice it to say it's a sound tactic..

It is a sound tactic -- AS BOXERS DO IT. They don't try to hop in with a bil sao. ;) They move to create angles for punches, and as defense. You can't hop in with your body as quickly as you can throw a punch.

Moving to the outside at the last split second as you attack/counter happens all the time in fighting and in boxing as well--in boxing it's called a slip...

Most standup fighters sooner or later learn to move to the outside when using certain kinds of attacks, like a cross... It's just duh... Nothing so special or theoretcial or exotic about any of this...

Dude, it's not the same thing. Wrestlers use circular movement to set up shots too.

But as I was saying: you won't be able to sue this angle with the hopping enry and you won't be able to keep the outside line either (because the oppopnent will adjust). Instead of arguing with me -- yes you can! -- from a theoretical perspective, show me (video?) anyone that can do it in fighting, consistently (so that it wasn't a lucky shot), against decently skilled fighters (like a good MMAist or MT fighter). That evidence doesn't exist because no one can do it.

And I and many others have used the lifting knee thing to jam kicks on entry, another common tactic, even MT does the lifing knee thing <takoon?> to block/jam kicks, moving in with it is even better to jam, but you don't leap with it...

Sure you and many others use it -- lots of people do all kinds of skilly things. Show me someone that does it in 100% fighting, consistently, against people with some skills.

Yes, MT raised the leg, but not while moving forward. You will have no base and if he kicks you with a good thai shot, he'll take you out.

As for Jong Sao it's neutral position and occupation of the line is useful IMO.. but the hands keep moving...

A few rounds of sparring with a good boxer will disavow you of that opinion. :)

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 05:38 PM

And what you'll argue against some other part of the technique. What good is a video if you can't understand the principle.

Who cares about the principles? I want to see it work. What good is the principle if you can't make it work? Do you think fighting takes place on a chalkboard? You see, my theory says . . . .

Post that video of your stuffing the MT fighter's kicks over and over with your entry technique, of your getting and keeping the outside line, etc. Or, just do what all theoretical people do -- tell me how it does work, how the principle is correct, that you've used it and it has worked, etc. In other words, do everything but show us that what you say is true.

You want to make this harder than it needs to be the raised leg guards against a kick before moving forward similar to a forward guard hand. If you have seen Tony Jaa raise his knee while practising you have seen the same raised MT knee as TWC so once again Terence you are wrong but nothing new there.

MT does not use this hopping, skipping entry. In MT and MMA, they raise the leg as a cover while in base. It's like raising your arm/elbow to cover your head agaisnt a hook. It makes sense if you have base -- since there will be an impact that you need to be able to absorb. If you don't ahve the base, you will be knocked off-balance (perhaps down).

canglong

07-30-2007, 06:26 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
Post that video of your stuffing the MT fighter's kicks over and over with your entry technique, of your getting and keeping the outside line, etc. Or, just do what all theoretical people do -- tell me how it does work, how the principle is correct, that you've used it and it has worked, etc. In other words, do everything but show us that what you say is true.Should that be posted next to all your shining works of art. Terence for someone that claims not to talk excessively when I compare your join date to that of mine and then your number of post to mine I think you talk more than you post videos and wine more than some children I know. originally posted by t_niehoff
It makes sense if you have base -- since there will be an impact that you need to be able to absorb. If you don't ahve the base, you will be knocked off-balance (perhaps down).Now you are saying leave your horse to create a base on one foot:rolleyes: oh yeah thats right you are the same person that doesn't believe in principle, "Who cares about the principles? " so a one legged base probably does sound good to you.

YungChun

07-30-2007, 06:26 PM

Post that video of your stuffing the MT fighter's kicks over and over with your entry technique, of your getting and keeping the outside line, etc. Or, just do what all theoretical people do -- tell me how it does work, how the principle is correct, that you've used it and it has worked, etc. In other words, do everything but show us that what you say is true.

You don't show anyone jack schit.. You just tell every one they're full of it unless THEY post vids... YOU are a Hypocrite.. All you do is talk about how everyone's experience is irrelevant except yours... That's called being pig headed... I think that the folks you fight are probably really good, and you probably can't make anything work on them, get your butt kicked regularly and as a result spend hours on the puter each day telling everyone else that the only reason they can make anything work is because they are not fighting the folks you are and getting their azz handed to them in each session the way you do...

MT does not use this hopping, skipping entry. In MT and MMA, they raise the leg as a cover while in base.

Actually, as I was shown by a MT trainer they start on the ball of the foot and when absorbing energy allow the foot to land on the heel, becoming flat..

You say entering with the raised knee doesn't work, BS I and scores of others have used it, use it and will use it... It offers other benefits, taking position and taking space away and closing stuffing the force.. Take it to the extreme and you have a flying knee...

Moving to the outside is not hard, you just move to the outside... It forces them to keep re adjusting, boxing coaches teach this.. What in GOD's name do you mean folks can't do that? It's preposterous... YOU are preposterous..

It's simply changing the angle in a pre entry phase... BFD!

Slipping can't be done?

Nothing can be done, only you the magnificent Terence can do it, or maybe not because you are fighting the only skilled fighters in the world and only those fighters with whom you spar are legitimate measuring sticks...

You see no value in starting, using, attacking on the centerline with one or more hands? Then I don't think you know jack schit about WCK or controlling the centerline...the core of the 'method'.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 06:34 PM

Should that be posted next to all your shining works of art. Terence for someone that claims not to talk excessively when I compare your join date to that of mine and then your number of post to mine I think you talk more than you post videos and wine more than some children I know.

So now you change the subject from substance to one about how I post too much. Oh, what I surprise. When you can't respond to substance, the next thing to do is change the subject and talk about me. Thanks for admitting that you can't respond with substance.

Now you are saying leave your horse to create a base on one foot:rolleyes: oh yeah thats right you are the same person that doesn't believe in principle, "Who cares about the principles? " so a one legged base probably does sound good to you.

Yes, you can have one legged base (though it isn't as strong as two legged base). But when your body is moving forward with one leg raise, like in that entry technique, you don't have base. Don't beleive me, visit a MT gym, try your entry technique, and see for yourself.

canglong

07-30-2007, 06:47 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
So now you change the subject from substance to one about how I post too much. Oh, what I surprise. When you can't respond to substance, the next thing to do is change the subject and talk about me. Thanks for admitting that you can't respond with substance.The only substance here is in your mind you argue with everybody about anything then in your mind decide you are correct and everyone else is wrong. originally posted by t_niehoff
Yes, you can have one legged base (though it isn't as strong as two legged base).wow did you figure that one out all by yourself T. originally posted by t_niehoff
But when your body is moving forward with one leg raise, like in that entry technique, you don't have base. Don't beleive me, visit a MT gym, try your entry technique, and see for yourself. The leg raises then you move forward if performed the way you describe it would be a thrusting knee, oh but if you described it correctly there might not be room for you to argue against it.You don't show anyone jack schit.. You just tell every one they're full of it unless THEY post vids... YOU are a Hypocrite.. All you do is talk about how everyone's experience is irrelevant except yours... That's called being pig headed... I think that the folks you fight are probably really good, and you probably can't make anything work on them, get your butt kicked regularly and as a result spend hours on the puter each day telling everyone else that the only reason they can make anything work is because they are not fighting the folks you are and getting their azz handed to them in each session the way you do...That's about how I read it.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 07:02 PM

You don't show anyone jack schit.. You just tell every one they're full of it unless THEY post vids... YOU are a Hypocrite.. All you do is talk about how everyone's experience is irrelevant except yours... That's called being pig headed...

I don't post videos because I am not on here telling people this or that will work in fighting. I'm saying it won't. And I can't post videos showing it not working because one of you bright fellows will point out that my opponent was (perhaps) bad and didn't know the real principle (like you do, of course) - so I would be trying to prove a negative. You guys say it works, you've made it work, you know the real WCK principles, etc. So show us.

You may calling not believing it unless I see it pig-headed; but that's the only way to know if it is BS or not.

I think that the folks you fight are probably really good, and you probably can't make anything work on them, get your butt kicked regularly and as a result spend hours on the puter each day telling everyone else that the only reason they can make anything work is because they are not fighting the folks you are and getting their azz handed to them in each session the way you do...

Yes, the folks I fight with are very good and do kick my ass. And I can see from working with them, what sort of things can work, and what sort of thigns can't work. If a good, athletic, skilled fighter can't do it, what makes you think that you can? But if you can, and you know better, please by all means educate us -- put it up for all to see. Show us how you make it work against good fighters. I'm all for learning. I'll take good stuff from anyone. You just need to show me that it is good.

Actually, as I was shown by a MT trainer they start on the ball of the foot and when absorbing energy allow the foot to land on the heel, becoming flat..

So?

You say entering with the raised knee doesn't work, BS I and scores of others have used it, use it and will use it... It offers other benefits, taking position and taking space away and closing stuffing the force.. Take it to the extreme and you have a flying knee...

A flying knee is an offensive technique, like a kick -- where you raise your knee too! LOL! Once again, you miss the point: it's not the same thing. Neither is raisnig your leg because you beleive a kick is coming, realizing you were mistaken, then stepping down to enter. The mechanics, intent, etc. -- what you are actually doing -- is very, very different.

Back in the day, Benny Urquidez, the great kickboxer, used a similar looking technique (actually, this is where I believe Cheung took it from and tried to adapt it into his TWC) -- from a standard boxing guard position, he's raise his lead leg (knee) and shoot out his front hand (opened) into the face of his opponent (like a bil sao) while stationary as a defense against the low round kick. He shot out the hand to block the eyesight of his opponent (so they couldn't see his counter coming).

His technique, btw, was an adaptation of what many 70s point fighters used as an entry: the raised leg entry. It works in that environment because they are not really kicking with realistic power.

Moving to the outside is not hard, you just move to the outside... It forces them to keep re adjusting, boxing coaches teach this.. What in GOD's name do you mean folks can't do that? It's preposterous... YOU are preposterous..

It's simply changing the angle in a pre entry phase... BFD!

Of course you can move to the outside (circle them), that's what boxers and wrestlers do. I didn't say you couldn't -- I said you couldn't enter with that entry technique off that angle. And you won't be able to maintain the outside line. They'll close the angle when (or even before) you move. That step is too slow. And it doesn't threaten them and force a response from them.

Slipping can't be done?

Sure it can - but that's not what we are talking about. Try slipping while raising your lead leg! LOL!

Nothing can be done, only you the magnificent Terence can do it, or maybe not because you are fighting the only skilled fighters in the world and only those fighters with whom you spar are legitimate measuring sticks...

Lots of stuff can be done, and the stuff that can be done we can see in done. Instead of arguing how it will or should work and telling me stories about how you've done it, just show me someone who can do it consistently in fighting at 100% with good people (like decent MMA or MT fighters). I can't argue with that.

You see no value in starting, using, attacking on the centerline with one or more hands? Then I don't think you know jack schit about WCK or controlling the centerline...the core of the 'method'.

Just because you repeat some principle "attack or control the centerline" doesn't mean you can do it, know how to do it, understand what it means, etc. Holding your lead hand out there in "jong sao" isn't attacking or controlling anything. All it is doing is exposing you, limiting your offense, etc.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 07:15 PM

The only substance here is in your mind you argue with everybody about anything then in your mind decide you are correct and everyone else is wrong.

I don't think "everybody" is wrong -- because not "everybody" does this entry stuff or believes it is any good. I decide what is good from evidence, from seeing it for myself work in fighting (at 100%) against good people. Not from theory or demos. I've been in WCK for 25 years and never seen anyone who could do use this entry technique consistently in fighting and against anyone decent. But, if the evidence exists that proves me wrong -- please, provide it. I'm more than willing to reassess my views in light of genuine evidence.

wow did you figure that one out all by yourself T. The leg raises then you move forward if performed the way you describe it would be a thrusting knee, oh but if you described it correctly there might not be room for you to argue against it.That's about how I read it.

Once again, this is the old you-don't-know-how-to-really-do-it-like-I-do argument. That might carry some weight if you would provide any evidence to back up what you say.

YungChun

07-30-2007, 07:43 PM

I don't post videos because I am not on here telling people this or that will work in fighting. I'm saying it won't. And I can't post videos showing it not working because one of you bright fellows will point out that my opponent was (perhaps) bad and didn't know the real principle (like you do, of course) - so I would be trying to prove a negative. You guys say it works, you've made it work, you know the real WCK principles, etc. So show us.

No you are saying that what everyone else does is BS and won't work, implying that only what you do, whatever that is, WILL WORK.. So show us!

I know what works and what has worked on the folks I have sparred with.. You say that's meaningless because you don't think it will work against the folks you fight... And that we must show you it will work against folks you fight..

So say we show you something that works against the people you fight and then you begin using it and it works on the folks you fight.. Then Chuck Liddel gets on the board and tells you that what you are doing is a load of BS because it would never work against the folks that he fights with.... And on and on…

I measure my success fighting and sparring against myself.. If I get better then I have achieved something.. Others who work security may have lived a little longer due to their skills and yet again this means nothing and is BS unless they post a video of themselves fighting someone you specify..

So what's your point?

If you can’t use your WCK to whip Tito Ortiz’s butt then I think you suck and have your head up your butt…

The point is that YOU are the one with the audacity and presumption to tell everyone one what they do is BS.. So you know better.. So I say PROVE YOU KNOW BETTER AND SHOW US!!!!!! If you can't show us then I say you are full of schit..

You think occupying the line, starting on the line is useless... If you don't start on the line then you must move to the line.. This allows the opponent to take the line first.. Once that happens you are playing catch up in terms of occupying the line... There is no problem starting on the line if you are filling space with structure but I don't think you use any of these things, from the most basic to the most complex in the method.. You probably look like a half assed kick boxer... And btw many of the 'proven' methods taught in boxing are only viable because they have GIANT gloves on... Many of the moves used in boxing become next to useless when you are bare fisted, such as taking hits on gloves, catching punches--go take your fist, put it on your head and let someone hit you...and see how you feel.. The reason the positions in WCK are not like those used in boxing is because absorbing shots on your hands, that are placed next to your face is not functional without those big old pads on...in fact its pretty stupid. Look at the positions used in the old days of bare fisted boxing and whoaaaaa we see guys with and extended guard.... But HEY they didn't fight those bad boys you do so....

Spar with those big old gloves on and you won't be able to use the small spaces WCK was designed to use, you will loose dexterity in your hands, you will have no structure to speak of using some half assed peek-a-boo guard and rely on your gloves to absorb blows.... This kind of stuff completely leaves behind the method of WCK..

Where is the WCK in your WCK?

Moreover you failed to provide the location of your school, if you even have one, so that folks can come check you out.. You did not appear at the sparring event which, once and for all would clear up the question of walking the walk, and you refuse to show us the RIGHT way which only you claim to ‘understand’ because of your mythical experience..

Only listen to those who can walk the walk yet we have no evidence that you have learned to crawl with WCK let alone walk

canglong

07-30-2007, 07:47 PM

orignally posted by t_niehoff
Once again, this is the old you-don't-know-how-to-really-do-it-like-I-do argument. That might carry some weight if you would provide any evidence to back up what you say.If I was as impressed with your 25 years in service as you seem to be then that might matter to me but your 25 years hasn't made your argument more superior more persuasive or less opinion than fact any more than anyone else on this forum. But as long as you believe you know it all then I am sure you'll continue your crusade to prove Victor correct.originally posted by Robert Chu
No opinion, just fact.
I noticed you didn't have anything to say to this statement even though it was just full of holes. Terence you are so transparent it's pathetic and you are becoming even more so with each and every post.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 08:38 PM

If I was as impressed with your 25 years in service as you seem to be then that might matter to me but your 25 years hasn't made your argument more superior more persuasive or less opinion than fact any more than anyone else on this forum. But as long as you believe you know it all then I am sure you'll continue your crusade to prove Victor correct.

I *know* that I don't know it all -- because I know that if a person can't do it, they don't know it. And I can't do it all! ;)

But I don't take things on faith or theory or belief -- I base my opinions, judgments, and conclusions on evidence. EVIDENCE. Funny, how all you guys that say you can make it work, say that you have made it work, etc, can't provide any evidence that we can see for ourselves to prove your assertions. You'd think that would be the easiest thing in the world - if it were true.

I noticed you didn't have anything to say to this statement even though it was just full of holes. Terence you are so transparent it's pathetic and you are becoming even more so with each and every post.

Just admit that you can't provide the evidence and leave it at that. We all know that's the case.

t_niehoff

07-30-2007, 10:02 PM

No you are saying that what everyone else does is BS and won't work, implying that only what you do, whatever that is, WILL WORK.. So show us!

It is because I don't believe you. It's nothing personal, but anyone can say "oh, I can make such and such work" or "I've had a zillion street fights" or whatever. These are empty claims. I can say that the elbow escape works. You don't need to take my word for it or trust my theory, you can find all kinds of videos of people using it in fighting, you can go to a BJJ school and see it done in fighting for yourself -- because it works there is all kinds of evidence of it working. When it is true, the evidence will exist, and anyone can see it. When it doesn't exist, . . .

My opinion on the "jong sao" (which is that it is not a fighting posture, but an action) is based on my experience, from seeing what other WCK people can really do when they fight, and from seeing what really good fighters can do if you give them an opening. And anyone can see it for themselves -- just go spar at 100% with some people with proven, good standup skills (like at a boxing or MMA gym). If you leave your arm out there, you will see the results for yourself.

I know what works and what has worked on the folks I have sparred with.. You say that's meaningless because you don't think it will work against the folks you fight... And that we must show you it will work against folks you fight..

What do you mean by "it worked"? That you were able to do it? So was the kid in the video. Did it make any difference in the video? No. He would have done better - been less open to the shoot, better able to defend the shoot, etc. for example - by keeping his arm back. His punch would have more power. He'd be better covered with his arm back, and better able to defend himself (which he would see if the other guy had had good punching skills).

As I said, lot of people do things in what they call "sparring", particularly with others in their same group, doing the same things, with the same poor habits, poor skills, etc. This is the problem. You can't learn what are and are not good fighting habits by working with poorly skilled people. Go to a really good boxing gym, one that has produced high level boxers, show them your "guard", and ask them -- after all, they are experienced fighters -- about what they think of it, about the strenghts and weaknesses of it. Then ask them to show you why it is a bad idea. They'll be glad to.

So say we show you something that works against the people you fight and then you begin using it and it works on the folks you fight.. Then Chuck Liddel gets on the board and tells you that what you are doing is a load of BS because it would never work against the folks that he fights with.... And on and on…

Solid stuff will work at any level. Obviously a person needs to be at that level in their skill/performance ability, but crap can and does work against poorly skilled people (crap works against crap) but it won't work against good people. For example, the elbow escape -- it works from white belt through black belt, works in MMA competition, works on the street, etc. I may not be able to pull it off against a BB, but someone (another BB) can! A good sign of crap is that no one can pull it off against good people.

I measure my success fighting and sparring against myself.. If I get better then I have achieved something.. Others who work security may have lived a little longer due to their skills and yet again this means nothing and is BS unless they post a video of themselves fighting someone you specify..

You can only measure your progress in fighting (developing fighting skills) by fighting with better and better people.

So what's your point?

If you can’t use your WCK to whip Tito Ortiz’s butt then I think you suck and have your head up your butt…

My point is that if you've spent years or decades, training something that you can't make work against someone with decent fighting skills, then something is wrong, very very, wrong. And if you beleive it is good, then the evidence of it working against good people should be easy to find or produce.

The point is that YOU are the one with the audacity and presumption to tell everyone one what they do is BS.. So you know better.. So I say PROVE YOU KNOW BETTER AND SHOW US!!!!!! If you can't show us then I say you are full of schit..

I can very easily prove I know better. Go visit a good MMA gym and spar with them at 100% and tape it. There's your proof. You'll see that what you train to do, what you talk about doing, you won't be able to do. See, I can show you. You just don't want to see.

If I showed what I can do, you'd just say, "OK, maybe he can do that, but it doesn't mean what I do is wrong." And that would be exactly right. My doing something else doesn't prove what you do is wrong. The only way for you to know about what you do is to see for yourself. But sparring (light sparring) with poorly skilled people won't show it to you.

You think occupying the line, starting on the line is useless... If you don't start on the line then you must move to the line.. This allows the opponent to take the line first.. Once that happens you are playing catch up in terms of occupying the line... There is no problem starting on the line if you are filling space with structure but I don't think you use any of these things, from the most basic to the most complex in the method..

This is not how fighting really works. You'd be much better off to stop thinking in terms of lines. You'd be much better off thinking in terms of are my hands in a place to do the things I will need them to do. Holding an extended arm out there will not permit you to do the things you will find that you really need to do in fighting.

You probably look like a half assed kick boxer... And btw many of the 'proven' methods taught in boxing are only viable because they have GIANT gloves on... Many of the moves used in boxing become next to useless when you are bare fisted, such as taking hits on gloves, catching punches--go take your fist, put it on your head and let someone hit you...and see how you feel..

I don't think you know much about boxing either. Boxing *skills* work on the street, in the gym, where ever. The tactics -- how you use those skills -- change based on the situation.

The reason the positions in WCK are not like those used in boxing is because absorbing shots on your hands, that are placed next to your face is not functional without those big old pads on...in fact its pretty stupid. Look at the positions used in the old days of bare fisted boxing and whoaaaaa we see guys with and extended guard.... But HEY they didn't fight those bad boys you do so....

The hands are up for protection, yes -- and it does work on the street, btw -- but also to facilitate body mechanics, close off openings, find angles, etc. People did do lots of thigns in the good old days, not because they were better but becaue they hadn't learned better yet.

Spar with those big old gloves on and you won't be able to use the small spaces WCK was designed to use, you will loose dexterity in your hands, you will have no structure to speak of using some half assed peek-a-boo guard and rely on your gloves to absorb blows.... This kind of stuff completely leaves behind the method of WCK..

How do you know what "WCK was designed for"? How do you even know it was designed in the first place? More theory.

Go spar some really good boxers without gloves and test your theory. When you wake up, have them tell you what happened. ;)

Where is the WCK in your WCK?

Even the question reveals you don't get it. Who would ask "where is the boxing in your boxing"? If you are using the tools/skills of the method (in question) in fighting, you are doing it, either boxing or WCK. Your level, your skill, your understanding, depend upon the level you can do it. Does really bad boxing work? Sure, it can. Against really bad people. How do you know it is good boxing? Because it works against really good people.

Moreover you failed to provide the location of your school, if you even have one, so that folks can come check you out.. You did not appear at the sparring event which, once and for all would clear up the question of walking the walk, and you refuse to show us the RIGHT way which only you claim to ‘understand’ because of your mythical experience..

Only listen to those who can walk the walk yet we have no evidence that you have learned to crawl with WCK let alone walk

I live in St. Louis and I'm in the book. I don't have a "school"; we have a small group of guys that train WCK together. And some of us crosstrain too. If you want to visit, you're welcome. I've had a few visitors over the years.

Knifefighter

07-30-2007, 10:10 PM

You don't show anyone jack schit.. You just tell every one they're full of it unless THEY post vids... YOU are a Hypocrite..

Pretty much everything T posts about can be seen performed by athletes against other athletes in competitive settings. You can find just about everything he espouses on You Tube. There is no reason for him to post personal videos of himself when you can find better examples done by professional fighters.

For those of you arguing counterpoints to his arguments, just point out the videos of good fighters doing what you are claiming can be done. You don't necessarily have to post videos of yourselves.

YungChun

07-30-2007, 11:51 PM

It's pointless.. You two will never get it...

It's too easy to refute here your written statements Terence, no point doing it anymore...

It's easy to believe I can do it.. Whatever IT is.. Just imagine me doing it on scrubs...

See now it's real easy to believe...

Even if folks posted said videos they would be labeled exceptions for whatever reasons.. Most TMA folks are hobbyists.. Most TMA are thought to exist for same so you don't get to see thousands of MMA types training in them at that level.. Maybe if you did you would see changes and new tactics from those arts in MMA but that isn't the case...yet.

These hobbyists may well spar hard but sadly they are not up to your elite standards because they are not sparring the right people, the folks who are proven...

You label everything to suit your theory Terence, okidoki...

Modern Boxing is what it is based largely on the fact that folks wear these giant gloves, have them take them off and the whole sport would change, no question... Very likely it would again reflect some of the older elements of the sport when it was bare fisted... A block consisting of a hand/fist placed in front of your face/on your head/face is good... Okidoki...

Fists are better than open hands, retracted structure is better than advanced structure...okidoki

Modern combative research says otherwise but... Terence has straightened us out... He is the all knowing all seeing, yet, invisible WCK man from reality with an antigravity YGKYM from no form..

Wing Chun techniques are BS.... But he does WCK.... Whatever WCK is when you take away all the training, forms, techniques and training/fighting concepts.. Whatever WCK is we can't define it but Terence does it...and we can't because we are fighting scrubs.. Okidoki... We fight who we fight, we improve depending one how often and how dedicated we are.. Not good enough though so we all suk... Okidoki...

Centerline is meaningless, don't think of lines... Forget the most basic tenant of the method.... Controlling the center.. The method without the method, but you have the TRUE structure.. To me it's a load of BS...

Terence is riddled with contradictions, he does WCK but doesn't follow any of the elements within the method except his magic antigravity biped stance which came from a form he doesn't do. He invites folks to come check him out but has no address.. I have no doubt that Dale knows that biped thing is a load of BS... Yet we are supposed to take this guy seriously ..okidoki

I have no intention of being the next Bruce Lee.. Or whoever.. When I was younger I would have challenged you to a fight if we were face to face and I would have trained for it..

These days I could give a crap less.. and I am not in the shape I was when I was hell bent for combat.. I know that I have improved and I was happy with what the system/training/method did for me--it allowed me to stop getting my ass kicked by scrubs.... Not a great feat but good enough for my meager goals..

There are others who worked in Prisons and in Security that feel the same way.. But our thinking is flawed, we are immersed in the folly of theory...because we don't fight the right people...okidoki..

It's cool, you go and do your thing, which seems to mainly involve posting insults here. Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to enjoy our training, and improve to the best of our limited abilities.. No we won't be fighting in the next UFC but we may just and continue to cultivate a modicum of skill and be happy with it...

Happy training Terence, whatever that means to you...

Phil Redmond

07-31-2007, 12:01 AM

Dutch MT fighter Remy Bonjasky http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCosqNTYN7Y
is known for his flying knees to the face from a distance.
Other fighers know about, and train to stop it but he still pulls it off.
The same goes for the "entry' which is not a hop and is not used all the time. It can quickly change into a front kick or knee. Btw the first and second place winners in the Lei Tai division I posted about succesfuly used entries multiple times. Those of you in the WCKCG will see the clips in a few days.
Phil

t_niehoff

07-31-2007, 12:24 AM

It's pointless.. You two will never get it...

It's too easy to refute your written statements, no point doing it anymore...

It's easy to believe I can do it.. Whatever IT is.. Just imagine me doing it on scrubs...

See now it's easy to believe...

You don't need to refute any written statement -- provide evidence that you can, or someone can, successfully pull off consistnetly in 100% fighting against good people. That's it. Look, I don't care if you believe you can send chi balls at theguy -- just show me.

There is a reason Dale and I have similar views on these things; we share some similar experiences (although I think he has had much more than me) with good fighters.

Even if folks posted said videos they would be labeled exceptions for whatever reasons.. Most TMA folks are hobbyists.. Most TMA are thought to exist for same so you don't get to see thousands of MMA types training in them at that level.. Maybe if you did you would see changes and new tactics from those arts in MMA but that isn't the case...yet.

LOL! First you try to weasel by saying that if people posted videos we'd poo-poo their videos. Thatwouldn't be a problem because no one is going to be able to make these things work consistently against good people.

Then you try to relate TMA to MMA -- sorry, TMA is fantasy-based. MMA is reality-based. If you train your TMA like MMAists train, it will look and feel like MMA. MMAists aren't going to adopt things that don't work. It isn't a case of "yet". ;)

These hobbyists may well spar hard but sadly they are not up to your elite standards because they are not sparring the right people, the folks who are proven...

You label everything to suit your theory Terence, okidoki...

No, as I said, I base my conclusions on evidence. You have fought with some midgets. BFD. That is supposed to prove your theory is good? Go fight some decent people. If you have, and what you do works, then what is the problem showing it?

Modern Boxing is what it is based largely on the fact that folks wear these giant gloves, have them take them off and the whole sport would change, no question... Very likely it would again reflect some of the older elements of the sport when it was bare fisted... A block consisting of a hand/fist placed in front of your face/on your head/face is good... Okidoki...

More theory (would, would). Boxing has evolved over time as people have gotten better, learned more about how to train, etc. As I said, go down to a good boxing gym and spar with some good people without gloves. You'll see that the glvoes aren't that big a deal.

Fists are better than open hands, retracted structure is better than advanced structure...okidoki

It all depends on what you are doing. The "wck guard" (your jong sao) has many weaknesses and few things to recommend it.

Modern combative research says otherwise but... Terence has straightened us out... He is the all knowing all seeing, yet, invisible WCK man from reality with an antigravity YGKYM from no form..

"Modern combative research"? LOL! Where did that come from? If you want to see and/or participate in real combative research, go spar with some really good fighters. They won't be standing there in jong sao and they'll be very happy you are. ;)

Wing Chun techniques are BS.... But he does WCK.... Whatever WCK is when you take away all the training, forms and training/fighting concepts.. Whatever WCK is we can't define it but Terence does it...and we can't because we are fighting scrubs.. Okidoki... We fight who we fight, we improve depending one how often and how dedicated we are.. Not good enough though so we all suk... Okidoki...

I never said WCK techniques are BS. Just the way people try to do them, when they try to do them, and how they train them are BS. I can define WCK -- it is fighting with WCK tools (its skills/technqiues). I can define poor WCK too -- it is not being able to fight very well with WCK tools.

Centerline is meaningless, don't think of lines... Forget the most basic tenant of the method.... Controlling the center.. The method without the method, but you have the TRUE structure.. To me it's a load of BS...

Of course it is BS to you, because you are brainwashed by theory. You believe that you hvae the concepts (theory), that you know what they mean, how they are applied, etc. and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You don't beleive this because of evidence, that you've ver seen anyone able to use that theory, move the way you move in training, etc. while fighting at any decent level of skill, but you know, in your mind, that it is correct. You've swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

The truth is you don't know. You don't understand anything unless and until you can do it in fighting, at 100%, against decently skilled people. Playfighting and chi sao doesn't provide skill or understanding of fighting. Fighting does.

But, asI said, you can prove me wrong. Go to that local MMA gym and spar with some decent guys. Show us all how well you really know.

Terence is riddled with contradictions, he does WCK but doesn't follow any of the elements within the method except his magic antigravity biped stance which came from a form he doesn't do. He invites folks to come check him out but has no address.. I have no doubt that Dale knows that biped thing is a load of BS... Yet we are supposed to take this guy seriously ..okidoki

I said I'm in the phonebook. How difficult is that to find? I'll also be in LA next June, and you can meet up with me there.

Yes, I do WCK. And I let application be my sifu, not theory. If you want to see what I do, then visit. If not, I don't care. The only requirement we have is that anyone who visits must participate. So bring your gear.

Hendrik

07-31-2007, 01:19 AM

Want a reality check?

if you are trained to standing in YJKYM with your weight on your heel and clamping your butt. Then, it is a hard reality that that habit make you not able to sustain the in comming force.

and

in that case, those kind of habit is going to determine -- being take down to the ground.

Because those type of training is indeed against nature and open for being take down.

Cold fact but do we willing to face it?

Peace

jesper

07-31-2007, 01:23 AM

More theory (would, would). Boxing has evolved over time as people have gotten better, learned more about how to train, etc. As I said, go down to a good boxing gym and spar with some good people without gloves. You'll see that the glvoes aren't that big a deal.

Quite often you see good boxers break their hands in real fights, since they are not used to hitting without gloves on. Remember gloves are there to protect his hands, not your head.
But other than that I agree with you

Knifefighter

07-31-2007, 01:40 AM

.

Modern Boxing is what it is based largely on the fact that folks wear these giant gloves, have them take them off and the whole sport would change, no question... Very likely it would again reflect some of the older elements of the sport when it was bare fisted... A block consisting of a hand/fist placed in front of your face/on your head/face is good... Okidoki...

Fists are better than open hands, retracted structure is better than advanced structure...okidoki

Modern combative research says otherwise but...

What research is this? Can you site your source?

I have no doubt that Dale knows that biped thing is a load of BS... .

Actually, I'm not sure exactly what you are talking about with that.

The biped thing?

Do you mean about raising the knee and hopping in? If so, no... I don't think I want to be doing that. A flying knee is one thing. Raising the knee and then hopping in is another.

There are others who worked in Prisons and in Security that feel the same way.. But our thinking is flawed, we are immersed in the folly of theory...because we don't fight the right people...okidoki..

Working prisons and security and taking martial arts doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the effectiveness of the martial art. There are thousands of non-MA trained law enforcement and security personnel who do just fine when dealing with combative prisoners.

Knifefighter

07-31-2007, 01:48 AM

Want a reality check?
if you are trained to standing in YJKYM with your weight on your heel and clamping your butt. Then, it is a hard reality that that habit make you not able to sustain the in comming force.
and
in that case, those kind of habit is going to determine -- being take down to the ground.
Because those type of training is indeed against nature and open for being take down.
Cold fact but do we willing to face it?

LOL....

Want a reality check?

Go to any MMA or grappling program and stand there with your weight on your heels and your butt cheeks clamped in and see how long it takes before you are taken down.

Knifefighter

07-31-2007, 01:53 AM

Quite often you see good boxers break their hands in real fights, since they are not used to hitting without gloves on. Remember gloves are there to protect his hands, not your head.
But other than that I agree with you

They break their hands, not so much because they are not used to hitting without gloves, but because boxers develop so much power with their hits.

BTW, it is a myth that the gloves protect the hands more than the head. They protect the head much more than the hands. Thats one of the reasons you see so many one punch knock downs/outs in MMA with their much smaller gloves.

The wraps are the main protection for the hands.

canglong

07-31-2007, 02:22 AM

originally posted by t_niehoff
Just admit that you can't provide the evidence and leave it at that. We all know that's the case.Terence, once you see a video all of sudden the opponent wasn't resisiting enough to your liking blah blah blah the opponent wasn't anyone you know yadda yadda yadda show you another one yeah yeah wah wah wah. Just admit a video isn't the answer to your whining.

The point is if you don't understand and agree with the principle the only thing that will change your mind is experience and for that you have to know WC and do your own homework something you seem adverse to since you already have those magical 25 years in and have seen and done it all you are only here to correct everyone so desperately in need of your visionary work ethic no one could possibly get without you here to lead the way.

With all your zeal to help the unenlightened I was taken back when my search results came back. Youtube No Videos found for 'Terence Niehoff'

jesper

07-31-2007, 02:33 AM

They break their hands, not so much because they are not used to hitting without gloves, but because boxers develop so much power with their hits.

But do they not only develop this kind of hitting power because their hands are being protected while boxing.
it seems to me that most mma fighters hit using same methods as boxers and yet they dont develope as much power behind (could be wrong, never measured it) since they need to protect their hands.

Oh and your right about the wraps being the main protection of the hands. case of typing to fast reflecting to little on my behalf :)

Liddel

07-31-2007, 03:48 AM

the raised leg, guards against a kick before moving forward similar to a forward guard hand.

From an outside perspective, it does look like a hop though....
Balance all on one leg and for a split second the horse is OFF the ground.
Thats a Hop in my dictionary :o (regardless of its matial validity)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXA5snEYa8

There are seversal vids on this next page with examples of the entry tech, each time its used as an action NOT a reaction to a kick, and the person leaves the ground for a split sec.

http://www.wingchunkwoon.com/tech.asp

I can only speak from my own experience. The mojority of TWC entry techs that ive seen in vids on the net, show people using the tech on its own. Regardless of a coming kick or not.

Is that a misuse of the action ?

Like someone of another lineage chasing hands in a fight, trying to Chi Sao.
Wrong application. :rolleyes:

DREW

Matrix

07-31-2007, 04:24 AM

"Jong sao"? Is that what *you* call it? We call it jong sau also, but who cares what you call it. IMO, I think that you are right that this "position" is limiting. You cut off some options and if we were playing poker I could see some of your cards. ;)

As for that entry technique, it is IMO quite weak, regardless of the angle taken. A good kicker will make you pay for that move - for that matter a good striker or grappler will do likewise. You're not even on one leg, you have momentarily left the ground.

As for the video itself, I think others said it well. They both have learned some valuable lessons. :cool:

Edmund

07-31-2007, 05:10 AM

I can only speak from my own experience. The mojority of TWC entry techs that ive seen in vids on the net, show people using the tech on its own. Regardless of a coming kick or not.

Is that a misuse of the action ?

I think you're on the money. IMO A little tweak to the idea would make it work a lot better.

I don't think leaving the ground is the problem because generally the hop is from a fair distance away. The problem is the landing. The leg is coming *down* at the exact time when I would say watch out for a leg kick.

Never mind the angle.

I can't hop around in a crane kick stance. Once my knee goes up and reaches its max height, it's going to need to come back down. If I raise it before I'm in reach of a kick and then go in, my knee will be coming back down right when it might need to be coming up.

Contrast that to Mr Flying Knee, Remy Bonjasky. He jumps his rear knee in and it's on the way *up* as it goes towards the opponent, not down.

ScottS

07-31-2007, 06:33 AM

You do have to give the guy credit for fighting someone with reasonable MMA skills. Every single other video on the net is either a training video using someone with no grappling skills at all as a dummy or tournament clips using bizarre sets of rules and almost completely unskilled opponents. Despite this, the WC guy clearly had nothing. The MMA fighter was never in danger. It appears that the WC fighter was never able to connect with a serious punch.

The WC fighter's major difficulty was he continually found himself in classical MMA positions without the skills to deal with them. The fight regularly broke down into positions like the sprawl and the clinch. Every time a clinch developed, the WC fighter got taken down - of course he would. Around the 3 minute mark, you see a clinch develop and the WC fighter try to push himself away. Similar problems appeared from the sprawl and ground positions where the WC fighter seemed to have no knowledge of what to do and began to reply on gut instinct, i.e. street brawling.

In fact, the MMA fighter did not seem particularly skilled at takedowns or ground fighting. This only makes me wonder what a truly skilled grappler could do in a situation like this.

canglong

07-31-2007, 07:45 AM

From an outside perspective, it does look like a hop though....
Balance all on one leg and for a split second the horse is OFF the ground.
Thats a Hop in my dictionary Drew,
Good point, what one wants to focus on first is the validity of the martial principle involved regardless of what anyone wants to call the technique. The principle in question sweeps through the lower gate just as the hand would the upper gates before contact. I can only speak from my own experience. The mojority of TWC entry techs that ive seen in vids on the net, show people using the tech on its own. Regardless of a coming kick or not. Yes, that is correct just as one would sweep through an upper or middle gate with a guard hand the leg too not only as an afterthought to an in coming kick can also be used as a deterrent when the possiblity of contact exist.

Though the technique may be delivered in different packages MT raised knee, TWC, or HFY its the principle that you must question. If you are taught to sweep your upper and middle gates then sweeping the lower gates should not be that far reaching a concept for you to come to grips with. On the other hand if clearing your gates is not part of your regular training it is something you would need to experience before forming an opinion on one way or the other.

t_niehoff

07-31-2007, 03:56 PM

Terence, once you see a video all of sudden the opponent wasn't resisiting enough to your liking blah blah blah the opponent wasn't anyone you know yadda yadda yadda show you another one yeah yeah wah wah wah. Just admit a video isn't the answer to your whining.

The point is moot, since no one can really make that stuff work in fighting against decently skilled opponents. I don't expect to see videos of Bigfoot either.

The point is if you don't understand and agree with the principle the only thing that will change your mind is experience and for that you have to know WC and do your own homework something you seem adverse to since you already have those magical 25 years in and have seen and done it all you are only here to correct everyone so desperately in need of your visionary work ethic no one could possibly get without you here to lead the way.

This is the BS stuff nonfighting theoreticians use to sell crap to the gullible.

Look, I don't need to know the "principles" of muay thai or BJJ to see that it f*cking works, against really skilled fighters. That they can do what they train to do. And at all levels of fighting. That's the only standard and all anyone needs to see. This is because they really fight, and so need to really use functional skills, techniques, etc. If it doesn't work in fighting, they don't keep it for tradition's sake.

I'm not here to "correct" anyone. I'm not telling anyone how to "do" WCK. I'm saying that if you want to develop good fighting skills then you need to train like fighters really do. That's the only proven way to do it. And not to beleive people who haven't and can't do it because they are clueless. To base your conclusions and opinions on evidence (in fighitng) that we can see for ourselves, not stories or demos or chi sao. In the world of functional martial arts, all of this is standard operating prodecure.

With all your zeal to help the unenlightened I was taken back when my search results came back. Youtube No Videos found for 'Terence Niehoff'

If you want a video of me, bring a camcorder along with your sparring gear when you visit. ;)

canglong

07-31-2007, 04:25 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
I don't expect to see videos of Bigfoot either.The chance of us seeing you actually perform wc are about the same so what.originally posted by t_niehoff
Look, I don't need to know the "principles" of muay thai or BJJ to see that it f*cking works, against really skilled fighters. You are gulliable to think you know anything about fighting without understanding the principles all you have is the illussion of what you think you know and you're too stubborn to go find out what you don't know by training with anyone other than the people you considered skilled and those are all people that think like you so you are like the doctor that diagnosis himself.originally posted by t_niehoff
that we can seeAgain the mythical "we" lol as if one of you isn't enough. originally posted by t_niehoff
If you want a video of me,No thank you no one wants or needs a video of you.

Ultimatewingchun

07-31-2007, 04:32 PM

Just watch the first Entry he does on the vid - for arguments sake. Because he wasn't using the "hop" entry properly...(and btw, it doesn't matter if both feet are temporarily off the ground) - if you're WATCHING him the right way, ie.- his lead elbow and rear knee - because they give away his moves in time to react, ie.- putting both feet immediately down if he attacks the middle or lower part of your body - are you WATCHING him properly?

...And are you on the outside of his lead leg? Is he crouched ready to spring at your legs? - then don't use the Entry...will you be ready to put both feet down in time? - otherwise don't use it - judgment call...especially good to stop kicks - as was pointed out - but if you're WATCHING carefully - you can also use it when he's standing very upright and not looking like he's in position to kick.

And don't follow up with punches to the head when he's clearly low enough (and has enough space) to go under your arms for the takedown. Bad sense of distance on the Entry and bad sense of distance and timing with the follow up punches on that first one.

Kudos to the young guy in the vid for his effort - but he made many mistakes with the TWC Entry.

t_niehoff

07-31-2007, 04:39 PM

The chance of us seeing you actually perform wc are about the same so what.

The chance is 100% if you make the effort to come see for yourself. :) I'll even be in LA in June.

You are gulliable to think you know anything about fighting without understanding the principles all you have is the illussion of what you think you know and you're too stubborn to go find out what you don't know by training with anyone other than the people you considered skilled and those are all people that think like you so you are like the doctor that diagnosis himself.

If your "principles" don't work, what makes them any good? LOL! If they do work, that should be easily shown. Wrestlers, BJJ fighters, MMA fighters, boxers, judoka, samboists, MT fighters, etc. have absolutely no problem showing that they can do what they train to do. When people can't do that, we know it is BS.

Again the mythical "we" lol as if one of you isn't enough.

It might surprise you to learn that there are people besides myself that require evidence before reaching conclusions/opinions.

No thank you no one wants or needs a video of you.

Then stop asking for one. ;)

t_niehoff

07-31-2007, 04:43 PM

Kudos to the young guy in the vid for his effort - but he made many mistakes with the TWC Entry.

This implies that there is a good way to use it (and that you know it since you see the "mistakes"). OK, where are the videos of this entry being used (consistently) against decent MMA fighters or MT fighters or kickboxers in fighting?

canglong

07-31-2007, 04:57 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
The chance is 100% if you make the effort to come see for yourself.Always asking for that which you will not do.originally posted by t_niehoff
If your "principles" don't work,They are universal principles of fighting.originally posted by t_niehoff
It might surprise you to learn that there are people besides myself that require evidence before reaching conclusions/opinions.
Requiring evidence is not the crux of this discussion it is the way in which that evidence is acquired which is in dispute.originally posted by t_niehoff
Then stop asking for one.Again no amount of request seems to stop you from asking.

t_niehoff

07-31-2007, 09:05 PM

Always asking for that which you will not do.

Wrong. I am not asking to see your HFY. You were asking or commenting about the chance of seeing my WCK. Well, if you want to see my WCK, make the effort -- and then you can see it.

They are universal principles of fighting.

In your fanstasy world of "pretend fighting". How can people who can't fight particularly well, know what "the universal principles of fighting" are? That's just a dream.

Requiring evidence is not the crux of this discussion it is the way in which that evidence is acquired which is in dispute.Again no amount of request seems to stop you from asking.

It's really simple. Can you - or someone else - actually consistently make what you are training to do work in fighting (at 100%) against decently skilled opponents. That's all I care about seeing, the only evidence worthwhile. Because if you - or someone else - can't do that, there is nothing to support that what you do in training, from theory to exercises to techniques, is particularly useful. BS won't work in fighting at 100% against decently skilled people. That's the BS test. That's what separates the functional martial arts from the fantasy martial arts.

WoodenYummy

07-31-2007, 09:51 PM

Mr. Niehoff,

I mean this sincerely, but wouldn't the easiest way to prove your viewpoint be to simply post a video of yourself doing some WC against "real" fighters? I'm not trying to instigate anything, it just seems like the most reasonble way to dispell all this animosity. After all you continually ask other to post there vids to prove their merit, are you not to be held to the same standard? I for one would like to see what you are capable of. Honestly, to see what you find useful from WC in real fights would be a benefit to anyone reading this post. Thank you in advance.

YungChun

07-31-2007, 10:43 PM

What research is this? Can you site your source?

Tactical trainers these days are advising open handed moves, 'structure' that is far out away from the body and closer to the opponent--the fence--and not a peek a boo boxing guard and moves..

Actually, I'm not sure exactly what you are talking about with that.

The biped thing?

Ah, this is where T told you that he could stand square on to you and you wouldn't be able to move him backward even if you put all your weight on his chest.. Just more BS from T...

Working prisons and security and taking martial arts doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the effectiveness of the martial art. There are thousands of non-MA trained law enforcement and security personnel who do just fine when dealing with combative prisoners.
And there are many who do far less than "fine"....

If folks applied there WCK in dire and violent situations against thugs in prison and made it work then it worked for them... Despite the fact that T will argue otherwise.. For many others who got mauled in the line of duty things were less rosey...

There are clips of folks winning fights in competition with WCK but this isn't good enough for T cause its not MMA/NHB/UFC.. or with fights by those folks who kick HIS butt ... Too bad...

T tells us what will not work, even if it HAS worked for us, yet he cannot show us or tell us what he uses from WCK that does work, and he claims that he does "use techniques from WCK" beyond the antigravity biped <square> stance..

YungChun

07-31-2007, 11:01 PM

We call it jong sau also, but who cares what you call it. IMO, I think that you are right that this "position" is limiting. You cut off some options and if we were playing poker I could see some of your cards. ;)
Aside from poker...

JS can take more than one fixed shape or position and can move around, etc... But it does serve to occupy the line...

What do you suggest here, in the way of a guard position for use in "the duel"?

Phist

07-31-2007, 11:36 PM

Matrix

08-01-2007, 03:06 AM

What do you suggest here, in the way of a guard position for use in "the duel"?Jim,
The hand position shown in the clip is overextended, IMO. The lead hand does occupy the centerline, but is not in a good position to strike and the elbow is disconnected from the hips/horse. You can see that he needs to retract the hand before he attempts to do anything so he's telegraphing big time. Also, it seems to offer the opponent a good opportunity to bridge if he wanted to take it.
I'd like to see something more compact and more structurely sound than what is being displayed here. It's just an opinion.

YungChun

08-01-2007, 03:08 AM

Jim,
The hand position shown in the clip is overextended, IMO. The lead hand does occupy the centerline, but is not in a good position to strike and the elbow is disconnected from the hips/horse. You can see that he needs to retract the hand before he attempts to do anything so he's telegraphing big time. Also, it seems to offer the opponent a good opportunity to bridge if he wanted to take it.
I'd like to see something more compact and more structurely sound than what is being displayed here. It's just an opinion.
Aside from what was shown in the clip... JS as I know it, is done more compactly...

I often use variations of JS..but I don't limit myself...

What do you use?

Edmund

08-01-2007, 03:31 AM

especially good to stop kicks - as was pointed out - but if you're WATCHING carefully - you can also use it when he's standing very upright and not looking like he's in position to kick.

But why raise your knee if he's not in position to kick?
A hop is less adaptable than a shuffle IMHO.

YungChun

08-01-2007, 03:38 AM

>>Actually, as I was shown by a MT trainer they start on the ball of the foot and
>>when absorbing energy allow the foot to land on the heel, becoming flat..

So?

SO, you are saying that the BASE must be strong <laterally?> to use a lifting knee as a defense or as an offensive jam.. MT uses the ball of a single foot..

Given this apparently the former is just more of YOUR theorectical BS...

Using momentum to close PAST KICKING range and using a single leg/foot as a base offers just as much "base" as the ball of a foot.. :rolleyes:

Matrix

08-01-2007, 04:49 AM

I often use variations of JS..but I don't limit myself...

What do you use?Jim,
Yes, variations of JS, but not so over-extended and disconnected as was demonstrated. But as you say, why limit yourself? :)

t_niehoff

08-01-2007, 04:17 PM

Mr. Niehoff,

I mean this sincerely, but wouldn't the easiest way to prove your viewpoint be to simply post a video of yourself doing some WC against "real" fighters?

It would *if* I was trying to tell anyone what they should do -- I'm not. I'm telling them what will not work particularly well. Like that "entry technique." Like the "jong sao."

You can look on youtube and find lots of clips of good fighters "entering" in ways that are good. It's all the same.

The problem with me showing what I do or can do is that it is really irrelevant to the discussion -- it's not a question of me vs. them or "let me show you the right way". In my view, there is no "right way". There are many right ways and many, many more ways that simply won't get good results. So it is a question of can they make that what they train to do work.

Since I do believe you are sincere, let me expand: there is no "right" way to box. You can look at numerous top-level boxers and see a huge variation in what they do (in technique, movement, strategy, etc.). But this doesn't mean that anything anyone does is "good". What makes it "good"? That they can do what they train to do at a high level (against really good opponents). People who do box, however, will recognize things that just won't work very well in boxing -- they know that from boxing, being acquainted with what things you can do, what "sort" of things do work.

Throwing an uppercut from the outside with the rear hand while trying to step in, for instance, won't get good results. I know from experience. But let's say someone said, yes it will -- my theory or my sifu says this is great stuff, we practice it all the time. Then I say, OK, show me, show me someone doing that consistently against decent competition. If it is great stuff, we should expect to see it work, right? But, you see, there is no evidence that it really does work. And I don't expect there to be.

Should I do a video to show them the sorts of good things they can do? No, because although I can do them -- box my way -- that isn't necessarily how they should box. The only way for them to find out how to enter - for them - is by trying to enter against good people, and using their results to guide them. That's the only way. If I did a video and people tried to copy it, they'd just be doing more of the same: letting someone else tell them how to box. It doesn't work that way. The only way to learn to box is by you actually boxing. The only way to learn WCK is by you actually fighting with WCK.

Anyone who goes through that process and is honest with themselves, will see what doesn't work.

I'm not trying to instigate anything, it just seems like the most reasonble way to dispell all this animosity. After all you continually ask other to post there vids to prove their merit, are you not to be held to the same standard?

My posting a video wouldn't dispel the animosity. That I can make my WCK work, doesn't make it "right". It only makes it "right" for me. If I posted a video, people would point out that although I can make what I do work, that doesn't mean that what they do wouldn't work too. And they would be right. What proves whether or not what they do works is only whether they can make it work. Don't you see that?

I for one would like to see what you are capable of. Honestly, to see what you find useful from WC in real fights would be a benefit to anyone reading this post. Thank you in advance.

If you honestly want to see what I can do, visit me. Come train with us.

YungChun

08-01-2007, 04:33 PM

It would *if* I was trying to tell anyone what they should do -- I'm not. I'm telling them what will not work particularly well. Like that "entry technique." Like the "jong sao."

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=57

Looks like Alan and/or Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun uses a JS variant .... :eek::cool:

t_niehoff

08-01-2007, 04:39 PM

interesting match between couple of competent boxers:

guy number 1 keeps his spine erect all the time, and his leading hand is pretty much extended, kind of asking, stickin, pushing, restricting, blinding, measuring etc ...

guy number 2 bobs and weaves, ducks, seeks angles, keep his hands near his head most of the time...

guess who won?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=twZ8-47Rp8g

Klitschko (who had a reach advantage) made very good use of the jab -- but he wasn't doing what WCK people do with their "jong sao", so you are comparing apples and oranges. He was boxing. He wasn't standing in a "neutral stance", he wasn't hopping into the other guy's range, etc. He was boxing.

If a boxer is taller with a reach advantage and has a really good jab, the extended *lead* can be a potent tactic. You may also notice that Klitschko didn't just leave his arm extended either, that it moved back, forward, and was constantly threatening.

But this is a good illustration of the thinking many in WCK do -- they see some similarly between what they expouse (holding the lead arm extended in a prefighting posture) and someone using an extended lead in boxing and see only the "extended arm" and not everything else that is going on.

t_niehoff

08-01-2007, 04:43 PM

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=57

Looks like Alan and/or Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun uses a JS variant .... :eek::cool:

Are those pictures of fighting?

The same guy (Alan) in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpnq95UbUJw

Nick Forrer

08-01-2007, 04:47 PM

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=57

Looks like Alan and/or Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun uses a JS variant .... :eek::cool:

Watch 50 secs into this clip - his hand position and bridging method reflects what we do (although there are many ways of course)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fU8spMgJKGY

YungChun

08-01-2007, 04:57 PM

Watch 50 secs into this clip - his hand position and bridging method reflects what we do (although there are many ways of course)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fU8spMgJKGY

At 50 secs in they 'clash' and then he leads *constantly* with the side CHOP or Lan Sao.. Which IMO is not a valid lead in Chi Sao IMO because it would never be a valid lead in real fighting.. Chi Sao aint fighting...but it still isn't a valid lead in drilling..

So,

Demo = Jong Sao

Chi Sao = Lan Saos minus Luk Sao

"Real Fight" with no head contact = No Jong Sao

Clear as mud... :p ;)

Nick Forrer

08-01-2007, 05:07 PM

At 50 secs in they 'clash' and then he leads *constanly* with the side CHOP or Lan Sao.. Which IMO is not a valid lead in Chi Sao IMO because it would never be a valid lead in real fighting.. . :p ;)

My mistake, Try 1.09 in the clip.

Knifefighter

08-01-2007, 05:17 PM

canglong

08-01-2007, 09:33 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
In your fanstasy world of "pretend fighting". How can people who can't fight particularly well, know what "the universal principles of fighting" are? That's just a dream.So Terence, maybe you would be so kind as to share with those of us reading this thread what the universal principles of fighting are since it's now obvious that you know and understand them so well.

t_niehoff

08-01-2007, 09:57 PM

So Terence, maybe you would be so kind as to share with those of us reading this thread what the universal principles of fighting are since it's now obvious that you know and understand them so well.

As I told you already -- the concepts/principles don't matter. Looking at WCK from a conceptual POV is like looking at basketball or tennis from a conceptual POV: that's not how you learn or develop skill at that activity. What are the "universal principles" of tennis or basketball? Who the f*ck cares? Who talks that way? Certainly not good tennis or basketball players. Go to a good tennis coach or basketball coach and tell them you want to learn the "universal concepts" of the sport and they'll look at you like you are crazy. Or, do what WCK people do -- go to poor or nonplayers to get the "universal concepts"!

Like any athletic activity, baskeball, tennis, boxing, or WCK, you learn the fundamental skills of "the game", then practice those fundamentals, and then do the activity itself. What matters are you skills, your experience, etc. Concepts or principles may be suggested to beginners -- since beginners don't have experience and may need something to guide them in playing the game. But in the end, it is our own individual experience actually playing the game that matters (and that replaces any theory).

canglong

08-01-2007, 10:26 PM

originally posted by t_niehoff
As I told you already -- the concepts/principles don't matter.Oh now the principles don't matter when earlier you stated that people that know how to fight would know the principles and people that don't know how to fight can't know them.
Thank you for answering that question. ;)

t_niehoff

08-01-2007, 11:00 PM

Oh now the principles don't matter when earlier you stated that people that know how to fight would know the principles and people that don't know how to fight can't know them.
Thank you for answering that question. ;)

No, you said something about "the universal principles of fighting" -- and I asked you how could people who can't fight particularly well, know what those are? A question, btw, you never answered. ;) The answer is, of course, that they can't. How can someone who can't surf know much about surfing? How can someone who can't fight particularly well know much about WCK? Any "knowledge" would, in those cases, be purely superficial.

I was not suggesting, however, that these "universal principles" did indeed exist or that if they did, it really mattered. WCK is a skill (more accurately, a skill set) like boxing is a skill and like riding a bike is a skill - though a much more simple one. A person doesn't need to "know" the "universal principles of bicycle riding" - assuming that they even exist - to learn or develop that skill. Same with boxing. Same with WCK.

When you see WCK as a skill and not a belief structure, you'll see things as I do.

Wayfaring

08-02-2007, 12:51 AM

Klitschko (who had a reach advantage) made very good use of the jab -- but he wasn't doing what WCK people do with their "jong sao", so you are comparing apples and oranges. He was boxing. He wasn't standing in a "neutral stance", he wasn't hopping into the other guy's range, etc. He was boxing.

If a boxer is taller with a reach advantage and has a really good jab, the extended *lead* can be a potent tactic. You may also notice that Klitschko didn't just leave his arm extended either, that it moved back, forward, and was constantly threatening.

But this is a good illustration of the thinking many in WCK do -- they see some similarly between what they expouse (holding the lead arm extended in a prefighting posture) and someone using an extended lead in boxing and see only the "extended arm" and not everything else that is going on.

So in your opinion, if someone isn't standing in a "neutral stance", hopping into the other guys range, and holding their hands extended in a prefighting posture, they aren't doing wing chun?

If that's what I learned in wing chun I'd probably be as against it as you seem to be.

In that fight, Klitschko was using a flanking position well with his footwork combined with a reach advantage that allowed him to target centerline with his jab while his opponent had to adjust to deal with it, which he never did well. Eventually taking advantage of that position also opened up a line for a straight right which sat his opponent down.

Does any other wing chun practitioner recognize that flanking position as something they've been exposed to in wing chun training? Do you feel it's apples and oranges to you?

t_niehoff

08-02-2007, 04:23 AM

So in your opinion, if someone isn't standing in a "neutral stance", hopping into the other guys range, and holding their hands extended in a prefighting posture, they aren't doing wing chun?

No, because I do WCK and don't do any of those things!

I was - and I thought it was obvious, but there I go again expecting people in WCK to see the obvious (my bad) - referring to the video clip (that's what the WCK guy was doing).

If that's what I learned in wing chun I'd probably be as against it as you seem to be.

I don't know what you mean by "learned in wing chun."

In that fight, Klitschko was using a flanking position well with his footwork combined with a reach advantage that allowed him to target centerline with his jab while his opponent had to adjust to deal with it, which he never did well. Eventually taking advantage of that position also opened up a line for a straight right which sat his opponent down.

He was boxing. Boxing. Using boxing tactics with boxing tools/skills. Boxing. Get it?

And, dude, you should go back and watch that clip again -- it wasn't Klitschko who was flanking, it was his opponent. Watch the feet on the clip, the opponent's front leg was almost always on the outside of Klitschko's lead leg. Klitschko was fighitng from the middle, not the flank.

Does any other wing chun practitioner recognize that flanking position as something they've been exposed to in wing chun training? Do you feel it's apples and oranges to you?

You're doing just what I talked about. You see a superficial similarity between what you expouse (in theory) and what boxers are doing, and miss everything else that is going on -- just like you did when you thought Klitschko was flanking.

Wayfaring

08-02-2007, 06:10 AM

No, because I do WCK and don't do any of those things!

I was - and I thought it was obvious, but there I go again expecting people in WCK to see the obvious (my bad) - referring to the video clip (that's what the WCK guy was doing).

If you're referring to the previous video clip I understand. However, your statements blur into a generalized criticism of all wing chun that certainly don't keep the context of the original video.

I don't know what you mean by "learned in wing chun."

Learn - 1. to acquire knowledge of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience: to learn French; to learn to ski. (from dictionary.com)

He was boxing. Boxing. Using boxing tactics with boxing tools/skills. Boxing. Get it?

Being that he is a boxer, I figured that is what he was doing. However, as you are so fond of saying in a long-winded fashion, things that work in fighting are universal, regardless of what the label is. There are similarities in how things do work.

And, dude, you should go back and watch that clip again -- it wasn't Klitschko who was flanking, it was his opponent. Watch the feet on the clip, the opponent's front leg was almost always on the outside of Klitschko's lead leg. Klitschko was fighitng from the middle, not the flank.

I went back and reviewed the clip again. Absolutely Klitschko was flanking his opponent. Little small steps just to the outside of the line of Byrd. That 2 inch difference that gives an advantage. Once he steps on his foot. If you can't see that, maybe all your hot air about fighting skills really isn't based in anything solid. Sure there are times Byrd takes the outside position. Usually there Klitschko retreats - see that?

You're doing just what I talked about. You see a superficial similarity between what you expouse (in theory) and what boxers are doing, and miss everything else that is going on -- just like you did when you thought Klitschko was flanking.
And you are just because something has a label of wing chun discounting that anything a boxer can do could be a similar method. I've trained with good boxers. And seen that footwork before any wing chun training. I just learned some of the terminology and theory in wing chun behind why it works. But oh, just because it's theory means it can't contribute anything, right Einstein?

Phist

08-02-2007, 02:53 PM

Klitschko wants to keep the range that suits his reach advantage. To hide behind a Peek-A-Boo guard and crouch and duck would be very much against his interests.

I was half jesting when describing Kltiscko in WC terms ... but the point is, there is stuff that works in boxing, but would ill advised to use in real fighting, and in some cases, there is Klitschko who discards most of that.

Klitschko might be indeed bending the rules a bit by almost pushing with his extended jab leading hand.

Boxers can usually get away with bobbing and weaving and ducking because the rules wont allow the effective counter measures. MT fighters don't usually do ducking/crouching because they would get their head grabbed and smashed with a knee.

In UFC, Anderson Silva is a fighter who's used Thai clinch and head kneeing with devastating results.

t_niehoff

08-02-2007, 04:43 PM

If you're referring to the previous video clip I understand. However, your statements blur into a generalized criticism of all wing chun that certainly don't keep the context of the original video.

It is a generalization only if you do those things. ;)

Learn - 1. to acquire knowledge of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience: to learn French; to learn to ski. (from dictionary.com)

For me, doing forms, drills, etc. is not really "learning" WCK, at least not the substance of WCK. Just as learning some boxing form, hitting the heavy bag, etc. is not really learning to box. Learning WCK comes only from fighting with WCK, just as learning to box comes only from boxing (in the ring) or learning BJJ comes from rolling on the mat.

Being that he is a boxer, I figured that is what he was doing. However, as you are so fond of saying in a long-winded fashion, things that work in fighting are universal, regardless of what the label is. There are similarities in how things do work.

While what are functional elements of fighting are universal, what things people do and how they use them are not. WCK is not boxing.

I understand that you were trying to point out that flanking is a tactic that is common to many fighting methods. True. But how WCKflanks and how boxing flanks are not the same in my view.

I went back and reviewed the clip again. Absolutely Klitschko was flanking his opponent. Little small steps just to the outside of the line of Byrd. That 2 inch difference that gives an advantage. Once he steps on his foot. If you can't see that, maybe all your hot air about fighting skills really isn't based in anything solid. Sure there are times Byrd takes the outside position. Usually there Klitschko retreats - see that?

This time watch it with your glasses on.

Klitschko did very little flanking - he never got the flank or sued the flank. Most, if not all, of his shots came straight up the middle. When you stand between your opponent's legs you don't have the flank. That is, unless you use a different defnition for the flank than everyone else.

Klitschko is using some lateral movement (circling) to create angles but for the most part (95% of the time) he's standing between the guys legs/shoulders even with that lateral movement.

And you are just because something has a label of wing chun discounting that anything a boxer can do could be a similar method. I've trained with good boxers. And seen that footwork before any wing chun training. I just learned some of the terminology and theory in wing chun behind why it works. But oh, just because it's theory means it can't contribute anything, right Einstein?

Theory is BS. The more theory, the greater the BS. The more rigid the theory, the greater the BS.

It comes down to skill. WCK is an athletic skill, like boxing, BJJ, etc. are atheltic skills. If you treat WCK that way, your need and attachment for theory -- and to lineages, to legends, to sifus, to traditions, etc. -- will fall away. All the BS will fall away. As long as you hold onto that stuff, the BS, your martial art can't be functional, at least at a significant level. Because the BS, and the mindset that goes with it, is in direct conflict with the process of learning/training in functional martial arts. The two are like oil and water - they don't mix.

YungChun

08-02-2007, 04:47 PM

It comes down to skill. WCK is an athletic skill, like boxing, BJJ, etc. are atheltic skills. If you treat WCK that way, your need and attachment for theory -- and to lineages, to legends, to sifus, to traditions, etc. -- will fall away. All the BS will fall away. As long as you hold onto that stuff, the BS, your martial art can't be functional, at least at a significant level. Because the BS, and the mindset that goes with it, is in direct conflict with the process of learning/training in functional martial arts. The two are like oil and water - they don't mix.
What a load..

There's all kinds of theory, concepts, tactics in ALL ARTS/SPORTS.... It's what drives and guides the training...it's what makes one art like MT different from another like Western Boxing, different from WCK, BJJ different from Judo, etc, different methods, different tactics or similar tactics applied differently.

Wayfaring

08-02-2007, 07:37 PM

For me, doing forms, drills, etc. is not really "learning" WCK, at least not the substance of WCK. Just as learning some boxing form, hitting the heavy bag, etc. is not really learning to box. Learning WCK comes only from fighting with WCK, just as learning to box comes only from boxing (in the ring) or learning BJJ comes from rolling on the mat.

No duh. Is there a point there?

While what are functional elements of fighting are universal, what things people do and how they use them are not. WCK is not boxing.

I understand that you were trying to point out that flanking is a tactic that is common to many fighting methods. True. But how WCKflanks and how boxing flanks are not the same in my view.

There's the generalization again. Why don't you stick with "how MY WCK flanks is not like boxing".

This time watch it with your glasses on.

Klitschko did very little flanking - he never got the flank or sued the flank. Most, if not all, of his shots came straight up the middle. When you stand between your opponent's legs you don't have the flank. That is, unless you use a different defnition for the flank than everyone else.

Klitschko is using some lateral movement (circling) to create angles but for the most part (95% of the time) he's standing between the guys legs/shoulders even with that lateral movement.

Commentary with glasses on with time references to follow. I must have watched a different fight or you don't know what you're looking at.

Theory is BS. The more theory, the greater the BS. The more rigid the theory, the greater the BS.

It comes down to skill. WCK is an athletic skill, like boxing, BJJ, etc. are atheltic skills. If you treat WCK that way, your need and attachment for theory -- and to lineages, to legends, to sifus, to traditions, etc. -- will fall away. All the BS will fall away. As long as you hold onto that stuff, the BS, your martial art can't be functional, at least at a significant level. Because the BS, and the mindset that goes with it, is in direct conflict with the process of learning/training i