I never saw a boxer finish off a fight like that, though. Have you? I don’t know if Vitor had a any wing chun lessons or not. Certainly never heard that anywhere. But the way he chased Silva down with those punches sure did look like some sort of chain punch attack, didn’t it?
[QUOTE=Nite Templar;1076575]I never saw a boxer finish off a fight like that, though. Have you? I don’t know if Vitor had a any wing chun lessons or not. Certainly never heard that anywhere. But the way he chased Silva down with those punches sure did look like some sort of chain punch attack, didn’t it?[/QUOTE]
nope it looked like a boxing blast
and dont you think its strange that the only example you can think of of a wing chun type finish to a fight is from a brazilian boxer?
[QUOTE=Frost;1076582]nope it looked like a boxing blast
and dont you think its strange that the only example you can think of of a wing chun type finish to a fight is from a brazilian boxer?[/QUOTE]
yeah vitor has a classic boxing style and in the silva fight that was all boxing… no wing chun about it…
Just something I’ve been working on for a bit with some help from my friends…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i24mkN0ybZ8
Maybe it’s not the system/the curriculum. Maybe it’s the training. Instead of the patty-cake drills, Chi Sau and forms, perhaps there’s a better approach. (I’m not saying to get rid of the Chi Sau - just to make it perhaps a smaller portion that it normally is.)
And we don’t have to look far for something better. Take the pad-work in boxing for example. There are folks who are using this approach quite well in the WC world.
Heavy bag work. More cardio, body conditioning. Making the training ITSELF more functional.
I don’t think WC as a system/approach has to evolve…just the way it’s expressed has to.
Peace,
CTK
[QUOTE=Frost;1076569]please that was straight boxing, the only time carlson touched wing chun was to make money years later off seminars
none of his fighters including victor ever trained wing chun[/QUOTE]
Nite Templar never said Vitor studied Wing Chun. He said his barrage of punches was “wing chun like.” You could also say that it was very much like JKD’s “straight blast.” But I’m sure Vitor never studied JKD either! I think the point is that Vitor used something that worked well for him based on his own training. It just happened to be very “Wing Chun-like”, and it wasn’t “straight boxing”! 
[QUOTE=Frost;1076582]nope it looked like a boxing blast
[/QUOTE]
I’ve never heard the term “boxing blast”, and I’ve never seen a boxer charge across the ring throwing centerline punches that were the same punch with both arms.
[QUOTE=couch;1076585]
Maybe it’s not the system/the curriculum. Maybe it’s the training. Instead of the patty-cake drills, Chi Sau and forms, perhaps there’s a better approach. (I’m not saying to get rid of the Chi Sau - just to make it perhaps a smaller portion that it normally is.)
And we don’t have to look far for something better. Take the pad-work in boxing for example. There are folks who are using this approach quite well in the WC world.
Heavy bag work. More cardio, body conditioning. Making the training ITSELF more functional.
I don’t think WC as a system/approach has to evolve…just the way it’s expressed has to.
Peace,
CTK[/QUOTE]
That’s exactly what Alan Orr has been doing!
I think its like any training program, strength and conditioning, speed and agility, theory and mental drills etc. Do your VT when you train VT and your grappling when you train grappling.
Sparing (hopefully) or fighting (not the same thing) is when this comes togeather. You use the skills you need for that job.
MMA is not a style, its a rule set that tries to favour no style.
When you add stuff to VT its no longer what you learn. Teach the style how its supposed to be taught then go through the differences or changes and each can decide. But the VT needs to be pure so its not just what a few people thought was good. Yip ching said at the VTAA conference he was showing his dad that he did the punch in biu jee different. Yip man asked why ching gave his reasons and he said that was OK for him. He teaches what he learnt off his day but shows them his version.
[QUOTE=KPM;1076600]I’ve never heard the term “boxing blast”, and I’ve never seen a boxer charge across the ring throwing centerline punches that were the same punch with both arms.[/QUOTE]
That was a series of crosses thrown on the run, not centre line punches
[QUOTE=Frost;1076675]That was a series of crosses thrown on the run, not centre line punches[/QUOTE]
I haven’t seen the footage in a very long time. You may be right. But, by definition, doesn’t a “cross” come from the rear hand? If you are charging at someone with your body pretty much “square on” to him while punching…which one would be the rear hand?
[QUOTE=couch;1076585]
Maybe it’s not the system/the curriculum. Maybe it’s the training. Instead of the patty-cake drills, Chi Sau and forms, perhaps there’s a better approach. (I’m not saying to get rid of the Chi Sau - just to make it perhaps a smaller portion that it normally is.)
And we don’t have to look far for something better. Take the pad-work in boxing for example. There are folks who are using this approach quite well in the WC world.
Heavy bag work. More cardio, body conditioning. Making the training ITSELF more functional.
[/QUOTE]
Yes taking out ChiSao makes sense if you are going to do boxing instead of VT.. VT is not based on seeing things and hitting through openings you see…
VT is about controlling, breaking him down, issuing force and making those openings, not seeing them…
Good VT training is not about patty cake..
Are most evolving or devolving?
[QUOTE=KPM;1076678]I haven’t seen the footage in a very long time. You may be right. But, by definition, doesn’t a “cross” come from the rear hand? If you are charging at someone with your body pretty much “square on” to him while punching…which one would be the rear hand?[/QUOTE]
the leg at the back, its hard to charge both legs at the same time, that would be a hop
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1076573]If WC was like this, no it wouldn’t need to evolve.
[/QUOTE]
and if only people were kind enough to attack you one by one like that too…
Just because that side’s leg is in the rear sure doesn’t make it a cross…
If I recall what he did looked more like karate’s version of chain punching… Facing square with the shoulders and with continuous punches… The idea is essentially the same as in (some) chain punching, much more so than with any western boxing tools.
I am sure the clip is out there somewhere.
[QUOTE=YungChun;1076689]Just because that side’s leg is in the rear sure doesn’t make it a cross…
If I recall what he did looked more like karate’s version of chain punching… Facing square with the shoulders and with continuous punches… The idea is essentially the same as in (some) chain punching, much more so than with any western boxing tools.
I am sure the clip is out there somewhere.[/QUOTE]
the clips on the second page its what i commented on, he hits him with a serious of crosses and straights before running him down, you dont see that in boxing because the rings too small and the ref would step in, doent mean he didnt use boxing principles to actually do it
vitor was a good boxer, he turned pro for a bit, he adapted what he did in boxing to MMA, thats it, claiming it as wing chun like is like claiming his early wins were wins for BJJ (which carlson did lol)
This might not settle any disagreements about what Vitor Belfort was doing in that fight against Wanderlai - but if you really want to know what’s going on leading up to tonight’s fight between Vitor and Anderson Silva, then read this.
[QUOTE=Frost;1076690]the clips on the second page its what i commented on, he hits him with a serious of crosses and straights before running him down, you dont see that in boxing because the rings too small and the ref would step in, doent mean he didnt use boxing principles to actually do it
vitor was a good boxer, he turned pro for a bit, he adapted what he did in boxing to MMA, thats it, claiming it as wing chun like is like claiming his early wins were wins for BJJ (which carlson did lol)[/QUOTE]
That’s just it the “principle” is more VT than WB IMO.. If he did continuous “blasting”, keeping him off balance, stayed in range and faced him while he did it is what matters–that’s not WB by anyone’s definition I know of. And this is not higher level VT, even if done with exact VT tools, the running chain punch attack is what VT students do from day 1 but it’s VT.
Hey guys, It’s been quite a long time since I posted anything. I have however been learning a lot and training. My take on it is this. People need to stop arguing and saying “Is it a Wing Chun blast, Is it a boxing blast, What Style is that?”, etc. Think more in terms of logic, physics, and bio-mechanics. I’m sure Vitor Belfort never took a Wing Chun lesson in his life. The guys in the prisons who fight 52 Blocks style probably never have either. The old Irish and British bareknuckle boxers of the 19th century never did either. So why do these arts have so many things in common? Because it’s the most logical way. When you’re in close quarters, you’re naturally going to square up. It wouldn’t make sense to punch any other way than right down the middle. The old bareknuckle boxers punched with a vertical fist and the elbow down because they knew it was the best way under those conditions. Remember that in those days, kicks, knees, and standup grappling were allowed. That’s also why they kept their hands lower very similar to the jong sao position in Wing Chun.
There are other circumstances where a horizontal fist going over your opponent’s guard (cross) would be the best thing. A hook punch, sow choy (Choy Lay Fut) or roundhouse kick may also be the best thing to do in a given situation. I can already hear guys shouting out “Hey, that’s not Wing Chun!” If you are that close-minded, I think you’re just limiting your own development. So in response to the OP, I really don’t think it matters whether you call it or don’t call it Wing Chun. Just think about what makes the most sense. I’ve found Wing Chun to be the most logical martial art I’ve trained in so far, but I’ve also incorporated things from other things I’ve studied (Choy Lay Fut, Western Boxing, and JKD). If the purists claim I am not doing Wing Chun, then I hereby say “I am not a Wing Chun man” if it will make them happy.
[QUOTE=hulkout;1076699]Hey guys, It’s been quite a long time since I posted anything. I have however been learning a lot and training. My take on it is this. People need to stop arguing and saying “Is it a Wing Chun blast, Is it a boxing blast, What Style is that?”, etc. Think more in terms of logic, physics, and bio-mechanics. I’m sure Vitor Belfort never took a Wing Chun lesson in his life. The guys in the prisons who fight 52 Blocks style probably never have either. The old Irish and British bareknuckle boxers of the 19th century never did either. So why do these arts have so many things in common? Because it’s the most logical way. When you’re in close quarters, you’re naturally going to square up. It wouldn’t make sense to punch any other way than right down the middle. The old bareknuckle boxers punched with a vertical fist and the elbow down because they knew it was the best way under those conditions. Remember that in those days, kicks, knees, and standup grappling were allowed. That’s also why they kept their hands lower very similar to the jong sao position in Wing Chun.
There are other circumstances where a horizontal fist going over your opponent’s guard (cross) would be the best thing. A hook punch, sow choy (Choy Lay Fut) or roundhouse kick may also be the best thing to do in a given situation. I can already hear guys shouting out “Hey, that’s not Wing Chun!” If you are that close-minded, I think you’re just limiting your own development. So in response to the OP, I really don’t think it matters whether you call it or don’t call it Wing Chun. Just think about what makes the most sense. I’ve found Wing Chun to be the most logical martial art I’ve trained in so far, but I’ve also incorporated things from other things I’ve studied (Choy Lay Fut, Western Boxing, and JKD). If the purists claim I am not doing Wing Chun, then I hereby say “I am not a Wing Chun man” if it will make them happy.[/QUOTE]
This is very interesting, hulkout. That’s what I meant by wing chun like. I’ve never heard of Vitor Belfort ever doing any wing chun training either. And I’d bet that he never did. So squaring up is the most logical thing to do when you’re in close quarters? I agree. Liked your remarks about what seems most logical in other circumstances also. Makes sense.
Hulkout and nite templar- That is OK. Wing chun motions at their best are very natural motions in given contexts. You can find natural motions in other ways besides wing chun.
Back to class…
joy chaudhuri