[QUOTE=Knifefighter;757370]What do you think the most effective way would be?[/QUOTE]
Well, to get into this, I would have to explain a LOT of WC principals, concepts, theories, etc. Now, if that isn’t troll bait on this forum I don’t know what is.
The answer really depends on the situation and changes from instant to instant. If I give you one example for one situation, it wouldn’t necessarily work for another situation. So, you’d have to be more specific in your question.
Basically, I’ll tell you what I would NOT do. I would not just ‘cover up’ when someone is trying to enter with a flurry of punches. I wouldn’t just step back out of range whenever someone tries to enter my space with a probing jab (great examples of this: the latest arlofski fight, or the one between sanchez and koscheck). Always running away from attacks might be 'safe’defense, but it doesn’t win a fight either. Now this might work if you are trying to ‘avoid’ a fight..
And I surely wouldn’t attempt to just trade punchers with a guy staning in front of me in rage to hit me with a punch. Would you?
This to me sounds like lucky fighting at it’s finest.
John Will also advocates the development of what he calls IA’s or immediate actions, standard responses to the opponent’s movements. “He stands in my closed guard, I underhook his leg”, that sort of thing.
Pak Sao for me is damm near impossible/much less percentage with gloves on, so when i spar with anything over 8oz fingerless im a bit more like how you mention…
Using the forearm etc…
I sugggest you spend some time sparring with good people before you make statements like that – there is a reason you don’t see that sort of thing very often in fighting (between good people).
Pak sao is low percentage now? Maybe you guys haven’t watched a lot of fights.
Punches are parried all the time. It’s one of the few workable defences against punches.
LOL. I don’t think it’s that hard.
The “trick” is to put your hand between the opponent’s fist and your face.
Unless you have a gigantic head or baby hands it’s not that much area to cover.
Victor good analogy to music. I agree you must have a way for teaching things and you need drills etc. One of wing chun stengths from my pov is learning to use both hands at the same time with each hand performing a different function. I cant think of anyway to learn this other than chi sao.. For me it has always been a struggle to teach people how to fight as fast as possiible and to teach wing chun at the same time. For me for example i believe you have to teach the wing chun body mechanics to teach how to fight with wing chun. At the same time some drills etc teach unrealistic combat methods or not very good methods.
I always try to teach a drill or a technique like bong sau or bong lop and then try to teach how to use it in a fight at the same time. It is a work in progress for me. I am always open for suggestions.
“I always try to teach a drill or a technique like bong sau or bong lop and then try to teach how to use it in a fight at the same time.” (Hunt)
***WELL I think you’ve just hit the key right there, Hunt…the cooperative drill should always be followed with a “and this is how you use it in a fight” type of scenario - with various amounts of spontaneous resistance. Every class, imo.
Edmund a pak sau against a jab drill for you. Try it and then tell me what you think of a pak sau as a primary defense against a jab.
Stand with your back to a wall to prevent changing distance . I recommend headgear with a faceguard, have the jabber reach out his arm so that his fist goes to the depth of your eye. Punches from ****her away cant hurt you or cant even reach the target so practice against them is not needed. Now without changing distance by either of you and that is hard. The jabber throws full power jabs without turning his shoulder. If he uses a shoulder turn then just measure the starting position with the turn. have him do 10 straight fast full power jabs. How many does your pak sau stop before contact with the face mask. Then have him throw 10 jabs at different angles then 10 more including a jab hook. Everytime your mask or headgear is hit is a failure of the pak to stop the jab. Now repeat except use a fook sau instead of a pak.
Unless you are superhuman you will find what everyone who has ever done this has found as the jabs change from simple to angles and then complex with the jab hook your number of interceptions falls. use a fook sau and no drop off.
Next if you are using a pak you are using only the area of your hand to stop a jab. A fook provides the area of your hand and forearm. you can cover with the foof the pak requires pin point target.
Sure you can parry lots of punches. many punches that you can parry are thrown from a non threating range. When you are in a range where you will require dental work the pak wont protect your teeth the way a fook will.
Unless you are superhuman you will find what everyone who has ever done this has found as the jabs change from simple to angles and then complex with the jab hook your number of interceptions falls. use a fook sau and no drop off.
Hunt1,
I don’t agree with the point that you’re making.
By creating a false scenario where you MUST use pak sao even when not appropriate, you’ve taken the technique out of its context.
The pak sao is good for certain angles. A hook is not really a good one to use a pak sao on because it’s circular. (I’m not sure why a fook sao would be good for a hook actually.)
When the opponent uses a different angle you must adjust with the appropriate different technique or adjust the angle itself. That doesn’t make the pak sao any lower percentage. It’s not the answer to every situation and I didn’t suggest it was.
You seem to suggest the fook sao is the answer to every situation and I’m a little dubious.
Parrying the punch is seen in many arts and many fights - Gonzaga/Crocop even. Crocop was parrying quite a LOT of Gonzaga’s punches during the standup periods.
Fook sao you don’t see so much.
Next if you are using a pak you are using only the area of your hand to stop a jab. A fook provides the area of your hand and forearm. you can cover with the foof the pak requires pin point target.
I believe my point was that you don’t nead a large area. Your head is only so large (hopefully). You only need to ensure your pak sao is protecting that area which doesn’t require much accuracy at all.
[QUOTE=hunt1;757015]Good to see so many informative and civil posts for a change,except for Punch and his catty snide comments[/quote]Apologies, I didn’t realize what you were getting at at all… and we have so many tech vs tech BS discussions which just degenerate into lineage flame wars.
but he may have learned his wing chun in a sorority house.
Interesting, but no. I learned from Sam Kwok and others in his org, who I thought was your sifu… My wing chun is no longer pure Kwok - it has developed as I moved, and picked up more from other lines, and MMA and whatnot, but essentially I think of it as basically Kwok’s org’s.
I was looking for concept instead of technique since for me technique is adaptable to the situation. There is no one way to do something. What ever saves my teeth is correct at the time.
Completely agreed.
My first suggestion, which is simply crowding, is in my mind a very important and very basic WC concept (and before any of the realism police here call me on it, I don’t mean it’s just a WC concept!). It’s perfect for clinch and takedown/tackle too (at least the way I learned the tackle: being from very close range, not a big dive).
In my Wing Chun and that is all I am referring too. We cover we do not block. Cro Crop dropped his elbow either because he was trying to block the kick or possible as TN suggested to defend a take down. It is clear he was responding to the motion of the leg. This is a clear example of why we cover and never try to block. A block is at best an educated guess. Cro Crop guessed wrong. If he covered the side the kick was attacking instead he never would have dropped his arms.
OK, I agree with the concept, but I’ve always found this a bit of a strange term… how do you cover the whole of one side with your arm…?
I know that question makes me sound simple and a newb, and I have the answer through my full-contact sparring, but humour me.
Often, I think people aren’t really sure what they mean by cover, or how it varies from moving your arm to ‘cover’ another part of your side (otherwise known as “blocking”!) - not accusing you here, Hunt.
I think you are right on the money brother, covering with a kwan sao would have been the only option to save Crocop in that situation, even though I think he would have lost his balance because his stance was not structurely sound to take the impact unless he applied it with the pivot step which i don't think he trains. Gonzaga setup timing was right on. He pressured crocop not giving him distance and timing to set up anything. I used wing chun with a similar strategy when i fought in san shou competitions against thai style fighters. I would eat up there space, forcing them to attack and then i would counter them, or they would back up to try to access the situation, which kept them on the defensive
I think the results would be similar in a rematch between these two, if crocop doesn’t change the way he fights.
[QUOTE=hunt1;756875]For those that watched the recent UFC and saw Cro Crop get knocked out by a round kick to the head. There is a basic wing chun concept or method that may have saved him. Of course nothing is 100% and nothing works all the time.
[/QUOTE]
I haven’t read this thread yet, but I am betting someone is gonna say gan sau…:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=AmanuJRY;756927]…as for entertaining the ‘how would WC have saved him?’ question, double guan sau’s, advancing inside the kicking arc, and punches/elbows to finish.
[/QUOTE]
KF, sorry, I miss these sometimes in the morass of verbal abuse.
My view is that we will always do or try to do something in response to what our opponent does. But that isn’t the case of when he does technique A and you do technique B – the example given of, he shoots, you sprawl – because there is more to it than that. That oversimplifies the combative situation and what you need to solve it. As I see it, the shoot from the outside is part of a a whole game (at least, good wrestlers will have a complete takedown game), and you can’t defeat a game with a technique; you defeat a game with a game. The shoot is part of that game. If I am out of range and he shoots, I’m not going to sprawl; if I have a wh1zzer, I’m not going to sprawl, etc. A game, as I am referring to it, is a set of skills. You learn the skills, develop the skills, and put together your own individual game. Just like dealing with the shoot requires a game, escaping from the bottom when on the ground requires a game (the answer to side mount isn’t just elbow escape, though that is an element). Similarly, dealing with attacks from the outside is a game.
Edmund I dont know where to begin to throw out a drill without ever trying it leads me to suspect you are a true believer.
The drill is very real. You only are dealing with punches that can hurt you. Most people like to deal with punchs that are from long distance or not done with real intent. You should try to work with a decent boxer. Boxing punches are not Leung Ting arrow punches. A jab moves at different angles and if its close enough to do damage time for body movement to save you is minimal. The hook that i am referring too is thrown off the jab it is extremely tight and will remove your head if coming from a person with skill. Boxers have been dealing with jabs for a long time and their solution is cover not parry. Also parry requires you to chase hands.
A tried and true fighting stratagy is to through long range jabs to get the person to reach out and parry so you can take advantage of the gap the leave when they try to parry.
MR Punch, yes SAm was one of my teachers too. no harm done your suggestions are good ones. You are right communication is the key and it is very hard on a forum.
Covering for me begins with the fact that you cannot effectively block. Blocking requires you to see something calculate its direction speed etc and then get the proper weapon to respond. Blocking keeps you working at the time and pace of the other person. The key to covering is awarness. Of yourself and what areas are open and your opponent and where he can attack from. For example if he is facing you with a lead leg forward then a side step to the outside of the lead leg protects half of your body so I use a bil to cover high and Wu mid section to cover the side of my body that could be attacked. i am sure you have been through this stuff. Covering just comes down to knowing where you are weak and where the opponent can most easily attack. For me The knofe form teaches most of the standard covering methods. if yoiu can move forward and into a weapon you can do it unarmed.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;757689]But doesn’t one develop the whole game by first learning “technique A counters technique B”?[/QUOTE]
That is part of it, and I don’t deny that takes place. There is an old saying about how “common things occur commonly” – and because certain things (combative problems) are common, so too are the answers. My view is, however, that the combative environment (as is most sport environments) is more complex than to permit a " tech A works against tech B" view since there will always be other factors (than just technique) involved, and those often effect outcome.
Also, I see technique not as something that stands alone but as a means of learning/developing skills – technique being but an example or snapshot of the skill in action. Sprawling, like most other things, I see as a skill (you can show many different examples of sprawling technique and they may all look somewhat different). Similarly, a jab is a technique but being able to jab effectively (jabbing?) is a skill (each jab or technique is but one example of the skill in action). So what it comes down to is really skills vs. skills (or game vs. game). Does this make sense to you?
Most people like to deal with punchs that are from long distance or not done with real intent. You should try to work with a decent boxer.
LOL. Seems like you’re attacking my creds.
Boxers have been dealing with jabs for a long time and their solution is cover not parry.
That’s funny. Because well before I ever started WC when I was training MT under Paul Briggs (current #1 WBC boxing light heavyweight contender ), parrying the punch was the first punch defence taught. And it’s for a real good reason. You don’t want your arms wandering up too high. It exposes your body.
We did plenty of boxing obviously but I guess you trained with better guys.
Also parry requires you to chase hands.
You don’t have to chase their hands at all. That’s when you completely fail to do it properly. You’d be swatting at flies basically. That’s the wrong way to do it and against the basic theory of WC or boxing or MT.
A tried and true fighting stratagy is to through long range jabs to get the person to reach out and parry so you can take advantage of the gap the leave when they try to parry.
Reaching out is wrong too.
As I said very plainly before: The idea is to cover the area of your head with your hand.
[QUOTE=Edmund;757718]… parrying the punch was the first punch defence taught. And it’s for a real good reason.[/QUOTE]agreed about a basic parry/pak. the boxing/thai hands are different to wing chun though as the guard position is higher and closer to the face/body than wing chun man/wu…
the boxing/mt parry uses no more than a few inches movement and is right close to the face. that way you’re not reaching and asking to get nailed by a double-jab, jab-cross, whatever.
=> just re-read your post after posting, yeah you covered all this
my guess is the wing chun answer to this is that the pak sao becomes a palm strike if it doesnt find the punch (also means follow the right geometrry, centerline etc)
also what i found interesting is that thai boxing has a few parries/hand movements similar to wing chun (e.g. kao sao) a lot of the time while kicking/knee-ing or going to clinch. the main difference is the basic structure of the art, how the hands move from the basic guard position.
(note about teaching method: the thai boxers etc dont label every shape pak, kao, fook, etc they just say parry it out, in, up, across, push this, pull that etc. getting it to work then comes from practice and working it out not following x=a*b+c)
