Footwork or retreat?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
21

[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;878419]…Yes they are. But we do test our principles against resisting opponents in the ring and in class.[/QUOTE]

Phil,

How do you test your principles in class? Do you spar yout WC? Is this the correct test of your principles? Sparring to me isn’t, as it is the application side of things. Application is up to the individual. When I defend myself or fight it is me fighting, not TWC or WSL WC, just me. You can’t test your principles this way, since the test is not specific enough. The true test of your WC, is during WC training IMO. I think the situation here is that the two of us have different ideas of what WC/VT represents. When I was in TWC, my thinking was application, technique. From my research in TWC over the years and years I practiced it, application and technique was the thing GM Cheung was after as well. This is fine and dandy. Today, the WC I practice is not about application nor technique, rather it is about body mechanics and concepts. Basically the difference is this, TWC tells me how to fight, what to do when someone does this or that. WSL WC other hand trains my body to move in a certain way, it gives me physical attributes and body mechanics so that I can 1) punch hard from short distances, 2) accept force within my structure and stance, 3) move fast with interruptable footwork and short stepping, 4) take someone’s balance away while striking them with punches and short kicks, attack their COG, as well as a whole bunch of other neat things. Now if you ask me what I am going to do when someone throws this punch or that kick, whatever attack, I won’t be able to give you a definitive answer, simple due to the fact that I don’t know. I will figure that out when the situation arises, all I do know is if you want to attack me, my first instinct is to attack you as well, chase your center, eat your space, hit you hard, and continue to do so until you are incapacitated. The insignifigant details, like tan/pak/bong/lop, this sau or that sau, are all actions to help me hit you. If the first hit doesn’t finish it, the system allows for immediate follow ups, each with the equal and vicious force. The system is not unbeatable, but it is definetely something to contend with if the training is correct. That is a big IF though.

Regarding your comment about the ring, I have no concern about anyone’s usage of WC in the ring, as WC is not a ring sport, nor was it ever developed for that place. It’s about street survival, getting out alive when the possibility of death or serious injury is on the table. Ring fighting is a totally different situation. IMO you can adapt WC to the ring, and that is fine if that is your thing. For me it isn’t and it doesn’t prove a thing when someone says what they do works in that arena. The idea here on this forum I would think, is not about proving anything, it is a place for discussion and revelation, but we are very limited here because there is no physical contact. Everything you say to me is theory, and what I say to you is the same, that is until we met face to face.

James

P.S. Thanks for the invite to the school in New Jersey. If I had the coin, I would take the next flight there to see what you guys are up to, as I’m always down for stuff like that. I live in Thunder Bay, just north of Minneapolis, about a 14hr drive from TO, so can’t make that seminar of yours either, thx for the invite though:)
Nothing personal Phil, just a difference in thinking and the way I see things now as compared to yourself.

22

[QUOTE=Liddel;878417]
2 things -

I feel this assumes you still have/own the space but most other styles move into the pocket when punching so your actually competing for space equally, in a sence…its already lost untill you get it back again.

You want maintain your space is a better way to say it IMO. If you dont step back or to the side maintaining your space, you may end up in a clinch and space is gone altogether. Too close is just as bad as too far away in a VT sence.

Situation is paramount - if its five guys in a park on you alone, running a good 20 meters to gain the space to turn and brace is a fair option. :slight_smile:

DREW[/QUOTE]

I agree here, Drew. Look at the Tony Blauer stuff. Or look at Geoff Thompson’s The Fence. In a self-defense situation, I have no problems putting up my hands to occupy the centreline, but backing up while trying to de-escalate verbally. Putting my hands up and stepping back is a great way to show I’m not aggressive - right before I fire one at their head!

My 2 cents.

23

Personally, I have never liked sparing with another WC person. It is like fighting one’s self if you know what I mean. But in fighting with people that are not WC trained, I have learned what works best for me. Being short and all.
I have found that in a real fight you may exchange back and forth until you manage to make something work. You might land a few, and you may take a few back before you get in the one that works for you. That is why it is called fighting. On the other hand, knowing that in a fight you also stand a good chance of getting your stuff beaten out of you, I have learned to back up when it is necessary. I try not to give my opponent a lot of room to maneuver, but then I can hit him from as far away as he can hit me, so I try to maintain the distance as I move with him. I use my center line to attach or defend, but so does he. And if he is coming right up my center line I just move it on him. I step off to the side and back to keep distance real. That way his center line is now off to my side and I adjust and shift to keep him directly in my own center line. He has to fight me sideways and if I am now quick enough I can rush in and control his side while I batter him. I have been able to spin a fellow completely around so that I am punching his kidneys out and stepping into the back of his knees. When you step into his knee he drops down. It is then that you unleash the dragon. I have used that so many times.
This is only when or if he comes charging in. You would never consider moving back otherwise. It is my theory that if you are defending then you have the advantage. The attacker always has to move into fortified ground.

24

[QUOTE=sihing;878435]Phil,

How do you test your principles in class? Do you spar yout WC? Is this the correct test of your principles? Sparring to me isn’t, as it is the application side of things. Application is up to the individual. When I defend myself or fight it is me fighting, not TWC or WSL WC, just me. You can’t test your principles this way, since the test is not specific enough. The true test of your WC, is during WC training IMO. I think the situation here is that the two of us have different ideas of what WC/VT represents. When I was in TWC, my thinking was application, technique. From my research in TWC over the years and years I practiced it, application and technique was the thing GM Cheung was after as well. This is fine and dandy. Today, the WC I practice is not about application nor technique, rather it is about body mechanics and concepts. Basically the difference is this, TWC tells me how to fight, what to do when someone does this or that. WSL WC other hand trains my body to move in a certain way, it gives me physical attributes and body mechanics so that I can 1) punch hard from short distances, 2) accept force within my structure and stance, 3) move fast with interruptable footwork and short stepping, 4) take someone’s balance away while striking them with punches and short kicks, attack their COG, as well as a whole bunch of other neat things. Now if you ask me what I am going to do when someone throws this punch or that kick, whatever attack, I won’t be able to give you a definitive answer, simple due to the fact that I don’t know. I will figure that out when the situation arises, all I do know is if you want to attack me, my first instinct is to attack you as well, chase your center, eat your space, hit you hard, and continue to do so until you are incapacitated. The insignifigant details, like tan/pak/bong/lop, this sau or that sau, are all actions to help me hit you. If the first hit doesn’t finish it, the system allows for immediate follow ups, each with the equal and vicious force. The system is not unbeatable, but it is definetely something to contend with if the training is correct. That is a big IF though.[/QUOTE]

I do regard the best way to test a martial art is to fight. And in no way should any martial tell you how to fight. Don’t live in a box is the saying at our school. We give people attributes and alternatives and they use what works for them. My C is also about body mechanics. I don’t think there is a fighter that doesn’t have body mechanics

[QUOTE=sihing;878435]Regarding your comment about the ring, I have no concern about anyone’s usage of WC in the ring, as WC is not a ring sport, nor was it ever developed for that place. It’s about street survival, getting out alive when the possibility of death or serious injury is on the table. Ring fighting is a totally different situation. IMO you can adapt WC to the ring, and that is fine if that is your thing. For me it isn’t and it doesn’t prove a thing when someone says what they do works in that arena. The idea here on this forum I would think, is not about proving anything, it is a place for discussion and revelation, but we are very limited here because there is no physical contact. Everything you say to me is theory, and what I say to you is the same, that is until we met face to face.[/QUOTE]
I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I was just stating how we train. Again, the best way to train a martial art is to test it against resisting opponents from different disciplines who are trying to hurt you. There are two ways to achieve this. Either spar or get into street fights. Now I know for self defense there is no need to spar. Anyone can get hit upside the head with a bottle, bat, or whatever by someone who doesn’t train. I’m not knocking your opinion. I just love the rush of the combat

25

[QUOTE=sihing;878435]Phil,

How do you test your principles in class? Do you spar yout WC? Is this the correct test of your principles? Sparring to me isn’t, as it is the application side of things. Application is up to the individual. When I defend myself or fight it is me fighting, not TWC or WSL WC, just me. You can’t test your principles this way, since the test is not specific enough. The true test of your WC, is during WC training IMO. I think the situation here is that the two of us have different ideas of what WC/VT represents. When I was in TWC, my thinking was application, technique. From my research in TWC over the years and years I practiced it, application and technique was the thing GM Cheung was after as well. This is fine and dandy. Today, the WC I practice is not about application nor technique, rather it is about body mechanics and concepts. Basically the difference is this, TWC tells me how to fight, what to do when someone does this or that. WSL WC other hand trains my body to move in a certain way, it gives me physical attributes and body mechanics so that I can 1) punch hard from short distances, 2) accept force within my structure and stance, 3) move fast with interruptable footwork and short stepping, 4) take someone’s balance away while striking them with punches and short kicks, attack their COG, as well as a whole bunch of other neat things. . . . .[/QUOTE]

I do believe the best way to test a martial art is to fight. And in no way should any martial art tell you how to fight. Don’t live in a box is the saying at our school. We give people attributes and alternatives and they use what works for them. My WC is also about body mechanics. I don’t think there is a fighter that doesn’t have body mechanics

[QUOTE=sihing;878435]Regarding your comment about the ring, I have no concern about anyone’s usage of WC in the ring, as WC is not a ring sport, nor was it ever developed for that place. It’s about street survival, getting out alive when the possibility of death or serious injury is on the table. Ring fighting is a totally different situation. IMO you can adapt WC to the ring, and that is fine if that is your thing. For me it isn’t and it doesn’t prove a thing when someone says what they do works in that arena. The idea here on this forum I would think, is not about proving anything, it is a place for discussion and revelation, but we are very limited here because there is no physical contact. Everything you say to me is theory, and what I say to you is the same, that is until we met face to face.[/QUOTE]
I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I was just stating how we train. Again, the best way to train a martial art is to test it against resisting opponents from different disciplines who are trying to hurt you. There are two ways to achieve this. Either spar or get into street fights. Now I know for self defense there is no need to spar. Anyone can get hit upside the head with a bottle, bat, or whatever by someone who doesn’t train. I’m not knocking your opinion. I just love the rush of the combat

26

[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;878465]I do believe the best way to test a martial art is to fight. And in no way should any martial art tell you how to fight. Don’t live in a box is the saying at our school. We give people attributes and alternatives and they use what works for them. My WC is also about body mechanics. I don’t think there is a fighter that doesn’t have body mechanics

I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I was just stating how we train. Again, the best way to train a martial art is to test it against resisting opponents from different disciplines who are trying to hurt you. There are two ways to achieve this. Either spar or get into street fights. Now I know for self defense there is no need to spar. Anyone can get hit upside the head with a bottle, bat, or whatever by someone who doesn’t train. I’m not knocking your opinion. I just love the rush of the combat[/QUOTE]

If I want to fight and test my skills for some egoic reason, then I would agree with you. Go out and fight other fighters from other systems. Then after some wins and losses, evaluate what needs to been improved and do it all over again. Sounds like a endless cycle of chasing a false belief if you ask me:eek:

This here is the difference between the two of us. I train because I enjoy the process of learning WC/VT. I would have to admit that constitutes 95 of why I continue to train in the art. If I didn’t enjoy it, then why continue to do it? The self defence aspect of it was developed years and years ago. I imagine if someone hasn’t learned it within the first few years they either have no talent or have a lousy instructor.

As for fighting, which is a comparison of skill in the art of combat, it is ultimately a sign of egotisical behaviour (if I can physically dominate you, then you will be submissive to me). This is different to self defence, which is totally about surviving a surprise attack.

The way I look at it, if I want to “test” my Wing Chun, I will do so against other WC people (I’m talking specifics here). WC to me is a training philosophy, a way of developing skills and attributes designed to give me an advantage in combat, plus a fun activity to participate in. Fighting is different, as now you are trying to pit your combative skills against someone else with similar abilities to test manhood & satisfy the ego. All I’m interested in is developing WC skills. I think we should all be honest here, unless you are getting into fights on a daily basis, why kid ourselves into believing that is why we are training, LOL.

I highly recommend, if you feel a rush from combat that you ask yourself why? Do you have a need to prove something to yourself or others? Ask yourself, do you really want to hurt the person in front of you, or are you doing it for alternative reasons? For me, if I had those feelings I would look deep inside to ask why. As human beings, I would think the thought or undertaking of incapasitating someone else for the pleasure/love of it would be something most would find very disturbing. If I remember correctly, GM Cheung himself said that once someone has the developed the skills of fighting or self defence, the need to prove oneself should be gone. Is this really true?

James

27

I don’t think there is a fighter that doesn’t have body mechanics

I think if anything most WC guys concentrate too much on structure and body mechanics, to the point where they get in the way, rather than help, in self-defense. I’ve yet to meet a WC guy who couldn’t talk all four legs off a chair about structure, elbow position, body mechanics, gates, lines, yadyadayada.

James, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that you got dudded on TWC by Lewadny, and that you agree on some levels at least. Hard to take the subtext of your statements any other way. The straw man arguments you make about TWC do not match my experience, nor Phil’s, apparently.

It’s about street survival, getting out alive when the possibility of death or serious injury is on the table.

Most of us saw Ernie’s recent fine vid on that subject too. The same stuff Geoff Thompson and Sandford Strong among others have been saying for decades. Jeez, I’ve had that “Surviving violent crime” link in my .sig for as long as I’ve been on the forum. Arguably, martial skill is one of the least important attributes in surviving violent crime situations.

AS it’s illegal and possibly dangerous and fatal to indulge in regular street fights to test our stuff, many of us still resort to some sort of practice fighting with rules, limits and protection to ensure our stuff works. Good luck to you if you’ve found another way, but I’m sceptical.

Or look at Geoff Thompson’s The Fence. In a self-defense situation, I have no problems putting up my hands to occupy the centreline, but backing up while trying to de-escalate verbally. Putting my hands up and stepping back is a great way to show I’m not aggressive - right before I fire one at their head!

No probs with that tactic, but that’s not the way the Fence is designed in my experience. The fence is exactly that, setting a boundary that the guy must not pass. Your hands are up, while you try to defuse the situation verbally, so that hopefully the guy senses he can’t successfully king hit you, or if he does you can and will then defend, and that you won’t be intimidated. If he touches the fence more than once, you push him away, both hands, STAND YOUR GROUND, and bark commands at him - stay away, don’t f***ing move, etc. to hit him with the adrenal dump. Either he’ll (hopefully) back off (flight), usually hurling insults from out of range, or it’s on (fight), so you need to be ready. You could argue that this is a version of man sao, asking hand, in a WC context.

If he’s adrenalised and you back away, he WILL chase you down, millions of years of evolution say so. So you’ll be fighting.

That might be a good tactic for you, but I see that as different from The Fence.

28

Sweet!

I just want to say thanks to all of you for offering your insights. I really appreciate hearing from so many varying perspectives on this matter. I am still realtively new at this, and very eager to learn as much as I can. I have the utmost respect for all of you for offering up your opinions & differences. Much appreciated. I understand that situations will vary, and that ideally I do want to occupy the centerline, I guess I was ultimately trying to get a feel for who does & does not use this “back & off the line” concept and how frequently. I have some difference of opinion with some of the comments made, but hey, I haven’t seen you guys, maybe you are a much bigger guy than I am imagining :wink: And when I brought this up, I should have been more clear, I am not suggesting that we are taught to retreat at our kwoon, its more like a move to clear your self from the path of something big, but we are certainly taught to follow that energy and use it to our advantage. Typically if a BIG round punch is coming through, we would step back and off the line, only to follow the punch as it passes with a Pak Sao or something and attempt to pin that elbow while attacking from the blindside. Anyway, thanks to all of you once again! I am pleased to see all the differences without the politics rearing their ugly heads! WING CHUN IS THE SHIZNIT!

29

[QUOTE=sihing;878477]If I want to fight and test my skills for some egoic reason, then I would agree with you. Go out and fight other fighters from other systems. Then after some wins and losses, evaluate what needs to been improved and do it all over again. Sounds like a endless cycle of chasing a false belief if you ask me:eek:

This here is the difference between the two of us. I train because I enjoy the process of learning WC/VT. I would have to admit that constitutes 95% of why I continue to train in the art. If I didn’t enjoy it, then why continue to do it? The self defence aspect of it was developed years and years ago. I imagine if someone hasn’t learned it within the first few years they either have no talent or have a lousy instructor.

As for fighting, which is a comparison of skill in the art of combat, it is ultimately a sign of egotisical behaviour (if I can physically dominate you, then you will be submissive to me). This is different to self defence, which is totally about surviving a surprise attack.

The way I look at it, if I want to “test” my Wing Chun, I will do so against other WC people (I’m talking specifics here). WC to me is a training philosophy, a way of developing skills and attributes designed to give me an advantage in combat, plus a fun activity to participate in. Fighting is different, as now you are trying to pit your combative skills against someone else with similar abilities to test manhood & satisfy the ego. All I’m interested in is developing WC skills. I think we should all be honest here, unless you are getting into fights on a daily basis, why kid ourselves into believing that is why we are training, LOL.

I highly recommend, if you feel a rush from combat that you ask yourself why? Do you have a need to prove something to yourself or others? Ask yourself, do you really want to hurt the person in front of you, or are you doing it for alternative reasons? For me, if I had those feelings I would look deep inside to ask why. As human beings, I would think the thought or undertaking of incapasitating someone else for the pleasure/love of it would be something most would find very disturbing. If I remember correctly, GM Cheung himself said that once someone has the developed the skills of fighting or self defence, the need to prove oneself should be gone. Is this really true?

James[/QUOTE]

You’re assuming that I love the sparring/fighting due to ego. You are wrong. But you’re entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.

30

I think if anything most WC guys concentrate too much on structure and body mechanics, to the point where they get in the way, rather than help, in self-defense. I’ve yet to meet a WC guy who couldn’t talk all four legs off a chair about structure, elbow position, body mechanics, gates, lines, yadyadayada.

I honestly believe the opposite, lol. Most of what I see online and thru personal experience with other lineages, the practitioners lack structure and body mechanics, but to each their own, some see trash, some see gold:D The key here is not be be a slave to the process, as it is only a training system. One should apply it as needed and with their own flavor. The problem is people get stuck in the process, thinking the training is the application, so therefore they stagnate and discontinue progression.

James, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that you got dudded on TWC by Lewadny, and that you agree on some levels at least. Hard to take the subtext of your statements any other way. The straw man arguments you make about TWC do not match my experience, nor Phil’s, apparently.

You could be quite right there. I just find it interesting that in 94’ and on film, that GM Cheung appointed Lewadny as North American Head. I think it is fair to say, since there is little video footage available and no one here besides me (there are other lurkers here that could testify to his abilities as well, but they lurk;)) that can testify to Lewadny’s skills, that no one can say definitively if he was dupped or not. All I know is this, 1) He was certified Sifu Level by GM Cheung back in 87’, 2) Back in 90’ in my presence, was told by Polish Instructor that he was recommended to teach international students by Aussie Headquarters, 3) Upon personal training with US TWC students in 90’ during GM Cheung’s 50th Bday, the skills taught, shown and demonstrated by the top instructors there where no better than Lewadny’s, in fact other instructors came to him for advice.

What I have realized over the years is that my first Sifu improved upon (IMO) and adapted to his students what he had learned from GM Cheung in Aussie land back in 86-87’. Suffice it to say, I have my own ability to evaluate who’s who in TWC land, and so far besides the GM himself, I haven’t seen any who match Sifu B’s skills, but I could be wrong as feeling is really believing:) The man was a Martial Arts genius IMO, and I still have great respect for his skills as a WC man and as a Martial Artist. But all of this is just talk and I am no longer a part of that organization so it is of no matter to me what people think of the man. If I want to really find out what someone is all about skill wise I would visit with them first hand, that way there are no if, and’s or but about it. I recommend that you do that Andrew before you comment on whether somone was duped or not:)

James

31

[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;878482]You’re assuming that I love the sparring/fighting due to ego. You are wrong. But you’re entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.[/QUOTE]

Phil,

How do you define ego? I define ego as a entity of the mind that produces a false identity, of superiority, of being special, of having to be different from common mankind. I find it interesting that anyone that admits to loving fighting is lacking in ego, but to each their own (just to clear the record, I feel the thrill of combat as well, that is why I avoid it at all costs.) If I told you that all of us are special, all of us are common, and that anything and everything you do, is not a reflection of who you are, would you believe that?

Good journey’s dude, I only wish you the best in the future and in health:)

James

32

[QUOTE=sihing;878500]Phil,

How do you define ego? I define ego as a entity of the mind that produces a false identity, of superiority, of being special, of having to be different from common mankind. I find it interesting that anyone that admits to loving fighting is lacking in ego, but to each their own (just to clear the record, I feel the thrill of combat as well, that is why I avoid it at all costs.) If I told you that all of us are special, all of us are common, and that anything and everything you do, is not a reflection of who you are, would you believe that?

Good journey’s dude, I only wish you the best in the future and in health:)

James[/QUOTE]
Ego;
noun, plural egos.
1. the I or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.
2. Psychoanalysis. the part of the psychic apparatus that experiences and reacts to the outside world and thus mediates between the primitive drives of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment.
3. egotism; conceit; self-importance: Her ego becomes more unbearable each day.
4. self-esteem or self-image; feelings: Your criticism wounded his ego.
5. (often initial capital letter) Philosophy.
a. the enduring and conscious element that knows experience.
b. Scholasticism. the complete person comprising both body and soul.
6. Ethnology. a person who serves as the central reference point in the study of organizational and kinship relationships.

I more relate to the 1st definition of the word ego. Yes, I am self aware and I do distinguish myself from others as do most humans.
Does a mountain climber have ego because he wants to challenge himself? Maybe. Does a sky diver have ego because he enjoys the thrill and danger of the jump? Do the people who dive with sharks have ego?
Does the soldier who trains for combat and goes willingly have ego?
Does the fighter who wants to see if what he trains in works in the real world have ego? The answer could be yes or no. It just so happens that some people love to test their limitations and are not satisfied with living in a safe theoretical world. Thank you for your good wishes. I wish the same for all people.

33

I was not saying you should step back when not in contact. This should only be done when your eblow goes too close or your structure or stance is being lost. The step gives you the chance to regain your space.
Not all fighting is about ego. As far as I know WSL was some what famous for his challenge matches, he also told his students that they should do it too. I know that WSL, my teachers teacher, and your teach (gary Lam) had several. This is the only way to test if VT works. Of course you can make it work against VT people you know exactly what they will do. They hit in the centre so you block in the centre. The real world people throw them from all angles and the size and strength differences change what techniques can be used. This does not have to be about ego. Barry told us stories were they would be having lunch and doing hoon sao under the table and the cooks would notice. They would arrange a match, if you won they gave food for the next week, if you lost you did something for them. They sat and disscussed what happened and learnt from them, this is not ego this is using VT for what it is for, testing the effectiveness. WSL used to say " VT is a sophisticated system of combat, nothing else. If you want to learn self defence dont learn VT. Unless you are prepared to fight to win you will lose" (not exact words but pretty close)

34

Some of the students from Duncan Leung’s school were training for full contact matches at Madison Square Garden. I was asked to be a sparring partner because the other sparring partners needed a break. I had done hours of chi sao and forms. Anyone who trained at the Great Jones school knows how tough the training was there. Since I was training hard plus the was allowed to wear an Everlast headgear that protected the front of the face I thought being a sparring partner would be fun. Well, I got hit with a full power blow that rocked me big time. My game plan went out the window after that. There’s a saying that goes, “Everyone has a plan until they get hit”. After that incident I wondered that if got hit hard in a real situation would I be able to continue or would I b1*ch up. That’s what got me into full contact fighting. Not ego.

35

I was not saying you should step back when not in contact. This should only be done when your eblow goes too close or your structure or stance is being lost. The step gives you the chance to regain your space.

Agreed, if your structure is being collapsed you toi ma (pushed step) to regain the space, but at the sametime you are still able to hit with structure and power.

Not all fighting is about ego. As far as I know WSL was some what famous for his challenge matches, he also told his students that they should do it too. I know that WSL, my teachers teacher, and your teach (gary Lam) had several. This is the only way to test if VT works.

I agree that testing what you are doing, which IMO is a requirement if you want to be functional with your WC/VT, is not about ego. As far as I understand it, WSL would accept beimo fights to test his abilities, this is still not the same as a real self defence situation, as there are rules and respect for the opponent during beimo fights, not so during when someone attacks you randomly. My point was, lots of people look at sparring and testing as the be all end all, plus they get a high out of it when they defeat someone in sparring. Sparring IMO is testing the non contact aspect of your ability to bridge the gap and safely enter the range where WC/VT is used. It is an important part of the training, if you understand properly what it is there for. Just like everything else in training, it is just there to make you more functional, rather than looked upon as the end result of your training.

Of course you can make it work against VT people you know exactly what they will do. They hit in the centre so you block in the centre. The real world people throw them from all angles and the size and strength differences change what techniques can be used. This does not have to be about ego. Barry told us stories were they would be having lunch and doing hoon sao under the table and the cooks would notice. They would arrange a match, if you won they gave food for the next week, if you lost you did something for them. They sat and disscussed what happened and learnt from them, this is not ego this is using VT for what it is for, testing the effectiveness. WSL used to say " VT is a sophisticated system of combat, nothing else. If you want to learn self defence dont learn VT. Unless you are prepared to fight to win you will lose" (not exact words but pretty close

Like I said in one of my posts, I was being specific. If you want to improve your “Wing Chun” skills, you practice it with other WC people. If you want to improve your fighting skills you fight. WC IMO is a training system, not a application system, there’s a difference here. WSL said if you want to learn self defence, learn the art of invisibility, since we can’t do that, the next best thing is to avoid it all cost, so far this strategy has worked for me. I for the most part practice WSL VT because I love it, it gives me pleasure to participate in the activity and to spread the teaching as well and making new friends is the best part:) That’s it. I haven’t even had the chance to use my skills in the real world in over 10 yrs, that is because I don’t look for trouble. If you are, you will find it:eek: The self defence skills were learned many years ago, my learning in WSL VT has only improved the effectiveness of those skills 10 fold.
Of course if someone attacks me, I will do what I need to do to overcome them in defending myself, but I wouldn’t call it “winning”, as that gives the impression that there was some sort of competition going on. In street defence that is never the case, you survive and hopefully walk away from it with as little injury as possible. Sometimes that is not always the case:(

James

P.S. I’ve heard many great things about Sifu Barry. I hope he is recovering well from his accident:)

36

[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;878259]That demo is in a controlled environment. It wouldn’t look the same if some really big guy was bent on hurting the smaller guy. We have guys here who can do many reps with 100lb barbells in each arm. During the adrenalin in a fight they could take the smaller guys punches and simply pick him up and body slam him if he stays in the middle.[/QUOTE]

Oh really, it will work if one just believes in him or her self and not have the might of others dictate how much man or woman that one could be in the ideal of dealing with grace under pressure, rather then falling into the fetal position way before one comes out the gate physically (tough cowards)…

No one is stopping you but yourself…

Ali Rahim.

37

[QUOTE=Ali. R;878577]Oh really, it will work if one just believes in him or her self and not have the might of others dictate how much man or woman that one could be in the ideal of dealing with grace under pressure, rather then falling into the fetal position way before one comes out the gate physically (tough cowards)…

No one is stopping you but yourself…

Ali Rahim.[/QUOTE]
Tough cowards???..lol. I’m not going to touch that one.
Many things can work and there are many approaches to the same goal.

38

Get real.

I think you both have a point.

Have you actually fought a guy bigger and stronger than you Ali ?
You look like you have size on your side from the vids ive seen of you. :rolleyes:

Obviously its situation dependent.

Ive seen two cops jump on a 120 KG Samoan after another cop snap kicked his groin and peppered sprayed him. IT MADE HIM ANGRY !

As much as i believe in martials arts and technique in fighting…sadly the truth is IMO… size and strength does matter, its not the be all and end all but it is an advantage at the very least.

DREW

39

[QUOTE=Liddel;878677]I think you both have a point.

Have you actually fought a guy bigger and stronger than you Ali ?
You look like you have size on your side from the vids ive seen of you. :rolleyes:

Obviously its situation dependent.

Ive seen two cops jump on a 120 KG Samoan after another cop snap kicked his groin and peppered sprayed him. IT MADE HIM ANGRY !

As much as i believe in martials arts and technique in fighting…sadly the truth is IMO… size and strength does matter, its not the be all and end all but it is an advantage at the very least.

DREW[/QUOTE]
You’re right Drew. Ali is 6’4"- 6’6". I don’t know the metric…lol.
The situation with that Samoan happens all the time. I’ve seen big guys go nuts in clubs and fight off the security. When you combine size and adrenalin size matters regardless of what anyone says. It’s simple physics.

40

No, But I got my a$$ handed to me by someone smaller (by 60lb.) years ago, and I felt the same way as Redmond felt when fighting smaller guys, that’s’ why I move the way I do (four strikes a second) because a smaller guy that is truly skilled can beat a bigger guy that just uses might all day long…

Ali Rahim.