Tai Chi wins in MMA

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
121

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
[B]Well, one of the things that makes the organized fight so much more compelling as evidence than the anecdotal street-fight is the fact that it’s been witnessed, reported on, and recorded. The street-fight hasn’t. A sanctioned MMA event attempts to match people of similar size and skill level, something that never has taken place in a street encounter. If I witnessed a fight between a muscular 300 pound taiji fighter against a 100 pound BJJ guy, I wouldn’t necessarily think that means a thing. Wouldn’t you RATHER have your art tested in open competition between competitors of similar size and skill?

Just an observation. [/B]

It has, just not reported in large publications. I’ve related such events before on this forum, only to get “oh yeahs”, and “must of been a low level competiton event” comments back at me. There was a current student, who is 18 yrs old today, and at the time of the competition only 16yrs old, with 1-1 1/2 yrs of training behind him. He competed in a Muay Thai sponsored event with similarly matched opponents and cleaned house. They couldn’t handle the basic attack of WC and the referees’s couldn’t either, due to the fact that they charged him with being to aggressive. How does one be to aggressive in a full contact event in MT? He won the event, and since then hasn’t decided to enter anymore. The same happened 7 or 8 yrs prior with another student within our school.

James

122

Originally posted by sihing
He competed in a Muay Thai sponsored event with similarly matched opponents and cleaned house. They couldn’t handle the basic attack of WC and the referees’s couldn’t either, due to the fact that they charged him with being to aggressive.

There is no rule regarding being “too aggressive” in any Muay Thai format. You are either wrong, or lying.

123

Originally posted by sihing
First we hear that to stay in tip top fighting form you have to be training and fighting all the time, then all of a sudden less is more (Sevenstar), lol. You guys should make up your minds..

dude, wake up… if y ou’re referring to the threads in the wc forum, we said in order to be called a fighter, you must actually fight. To be in shape, yes you must train. Hard. AND I’ve said that the avg sport guy trains harder than the avg wc guy. Many here agree with that. But, unless you are like 13, you can’t think that we train all day every day.

I think delusional is the wrong word to use here. I do not think WC is a magical Martial Art that requires no work and effort to learn & apply.

naive, maybe?

To gain high quality in anything in life requires hard work and effort. This is the literal meaning of KUNG-FU.

a literal meaning that seems to been lost to the many of people…

WC is no different. In the end IMO, if one puts the hard work in MT vs. WC, the WC man/woman will win in a fight. Why? Because the movements, strategy, concepts, principals, techniques encompass total effectiveness and efficiency.

This is where you see your delusion/naivete.

So if all of this is equal, what determines the most effective art? The one based on more effective and efficient movements.

The one with the best training methods, as I’ve always said and as FD mentioned earlier.

In the end when strength and speed are equal then skill will win. When strength and speed are not equal, then the only way to bridge that gap for the weaker party is superior skills, technique and concepts in fighting methods. WC provides you with this edge, that was the whole purpose behind it creation. Deny that and you deny it’s existence.

If you think this is true, go fight in a local smoker. come back with details.

The grappling is there, you just have to see it, and the longer range kicking is there too. Its how the WC system applies it that is different. Like Bruce Lee said, don’t grapple a grappler, don’t kick a kicker…

efficiency… grappling is there, but you “have to see it”? Where is the efficiency in that? it should be drilled extensively, not worked on occasion and termed “anti grappling” it should at some point in time be tested. bring in some grapplers and train it against them. Didn’t you mention that there were some grapplers at your school? How do they feel about anti-grappling?

124

Originally posted by sihing
[B]It has, just not reported in large publications. I’ve related such events before on this forum, only to get “oh yeahs”, and “must of been a low level competiton event” comments back at me. There was a current student, who is 18 yrs old today, and at the time of the competition only 16yrs old, with 1-1 1/2 yrs of training behind him. He competed in a Muay Thai sponsored event with similarly matched opponents and cleaned house. They couldn’t handle the basic attack of WC and the referees’s couldn’t either, due to the fact that they charged him with being to aggressive. How does one be to aggressive in a full contact event in MT? He won the event, and since then hasn’t decided to enter anymore. The same happened 7 or 8 yrs prior with another student within our school.

James [/B]

  1. as FD said, there’s no such thing as being too agressive in a thai match. someone is either wrong, or lying. And, I bet there is no other evidence of it, is there? Go figure…

however, I will agree that alot goes on that isn’t made public. Judo is such a big sport, the internet would die if every judo club in the world posted results of every shiai they attended. Local events don’t really garner attention either, but there are still people who record them. There is a guy here who makes DVDs of the local fights. I only recently found out about him, so I don’t have any of mine. I’ll get one from him next time though.

Two years ago, I was at a continuous sparring tourney (I posted about it here, the weekend after I saw it) - a WC in structor was competing. He was mauled by a shotokan guy. a friend of mine who trains thai boxing cleaned house that day - till he got disqualified for using a knee. He and a TKD black belt that was extremely good. The TKD guy ended up winning the event. the WC guy lost his first fight. I’m sure somebody recorded it - I’ll ask around.

125

Originally posted by SevenStar
efficiency… grappling is there, but you “have to see it”? Where is the efficiency in that? it should be drilled extensively, not worked on occasion and termed “anti grappling” it should at some point in time be tested. bring in some grapplers and train it against them. Didn’t you mention that there were some grapplers at your school? How do they feel about anti-grappling?

There are some in my school, too. Most are very interested in the techniques, but are very good ar disswading the gung-ho that it would stop them if they really wanted to pin you. Then they proceded to show us just how effective they could be against the “anti-grappling”. The only ones who could evade were the ones who were grapplers to begin with.

The only real anti-grappling technique is to not let the sombitches get thier mitts on you in the first place. And that just don’t always work.

126

“Victor,
The science of WC goes beyond the close quarters fighting techniques that most think. The grappling is there, you just have to see it, and the longer range kicking is there too. Its how the WC system applies it that is different. Like Bruce Lee said, don’t grapple a grappler, don’t kick a kicker…” (sihing)

Never said that the standing chi na arm-locking techniques weren’t there..or the sweeps…or the longer range kicking…

But these things are not the main thrust of the system - and are therefore (especially the “grappling”) limited in scope. No I wouldn’t want to grapple a grappler on the floor (or even in the clinch) just using wing chun - because I wouldn’t have enough in my arsenal for that.

The main focus of wing chun is standup, close quarter, infight striking/trapping/kicking…but mostly the very close range striking.

That doesn’t mean that the other aspects of the art won’t enable the WC fighter to do well at closing from long range (some WC systems anyway)…kick from long range…deal with someone trying to take them down, etc.

But against a VERY HIGHLY SKILLED clinch, grapple, and groundfight guy (and especially one who can disguise his entry behind decent strikes)… WC - by itself - is really going to have it’s hands full - in such a fight WC has no “advantage” at the standing infight range…it’s 50/50 at best, at this point.

I don’t like those odds, Do you?

Hence my advocation of crosstraining…which for me is Catch-as-catch-can wrestling…for other WC people I know it’s BJJ…for others it might be judo…whatever.

127

Originally posted by FatherDog
There is no rule regarding being “too aggressive” in any Muay Thai format. You are either wrong, or lying.

That’s what I would think also, but this was the case. It was novice division. Samurai Jack made the statement "wouldn’t I rather have the art tested in a competition against competitors of similar size and skills. I was just relating a actual competition in which one of our fighters fought people from the MT camp of same size and skill, and he won. End of story. Feel free to believe or not, doesn’t matter to me.

James

128

novice division or not, agressiveness doesn’t matter. no elbows, no strikes to the groin or front of the knee, no throws. no rule against agressiveness. Do you know who threw this event?

129

Originally posted by SevenStar
quote:

Originally posted by sihing
First we hear that to stay in tip top fighting form you have to be training and fighting all the time, then all of a sudden less is more (Sevenstar), lol. You guys should make up your minds..

SS:dude, wake up… if y ou’re referring to the threads in the wc forum, we said in order to be called a fighter, you must actually fight. To be in shape, yes you must train. Hard. AND I’ve said that the avg sport guy trains harder than the avg wc guy. Many here agree with that. But, unless you are like 13, you can’t think that we train all day every day.

Sihing: Not all day, just most of it, lol…

sihing:“I think delusional is the wrong word to use here. I do not think WC is a magical Martial Art that requires no work and effort to learn & apply.”

SS:naive, maybe?

Sihing: so its okay for you to believe what you believe and be right but not the other way around for others with different opinions, and you call yourself a Moderator??? Low standard on this forum I must say…

sihing “To gain high quality in anything in life requires hard work and effort. This is the literal meaning of KUNG-FU.”

SS:a literal meaning that seems to been lost to the many of people…

Sihing: maybe, but not to all

sihing"WC is no different. In the end IMO, if one puts the hard work in MT vs. WC, the WC man/woman will win in a fight. Why? Because the movements, strategy, concepts, principals, techniques encompass total effectiveness and efficiency."

SS:This is where you see your delusion/naivete.

Sihing: and this is where I see your tunnel vision towards your own belief’s. Disagree with me all you want, but please don’t put yourself up on the pedestal and preach to me about delusion and naivete. Put up some video of yourself and we’ll go from there. If its good then I will have no problem acknowledging your skills, but until then I’m starting to lose more and more respect for you as the posts continue, since your showing the same for my belief’s.

sihing"So if all of this is equal, what determines the most effective art? The one based on more effective and efficient movements."

SS:The one with the best training methods, as I’ve always said and as FD mentioned earlier.

Sihing: Not if the requirements of that system are strength and speed based. I totally agree with proper training practices. One that doesn’t train enough throughout their MA career will have less skills for sure, but if the training intensity is the same btw two individuals from different arts then what determines the more effective art. Things like individual will and heart and toughness are not a accurate measuring tools as these attributes vary to many degrees in people and depends also on the situation where combat is needed, and cannot be trained to any high degree. Either you have heart and will or you don’t. IMO the art with more effective/efficient movements is overall a more effective art.

sihing"In the end when strength and speed are equal then skill will win. When strength and speed are not equal, then the only way to bridge that gap for the weaker party is superior skills, technique and concepts in fighting methods. WC provides you with this edge, that was the whole purpose behind it creation. Deny that and you deny it’s existence."

SS:If you think this is true, go fight in a local smoker. come back with details.

Sihing: You wouldn’t believe me if I did come back with positive results in my favor, so what’s the use. Plus I feel no need to prove to you or anyone what my effectiveness is. I’ve said many times on this forum that I’m not a “fighter” but have very good self-defense abilities. I’d rather be a warrior anyways, as fighters need to constantly prove themselves, warriors don’t.

James

130

Originally posted by SevenStar
novice division or not, agressiveness doesn’t matter. no elbows, no strikes to the groin or front of the knee, no throws. no rule against agressiveness. Do you know who threw this event?

His name is Mike Myles, he’s the resident Muay Thai champ/coach, and probably has the biggest MA school in the city. He’s trained plent of current provincial, national, and international/world champs but I think most amateur fighters. He even walked up to our fighter and said to him is that all he had ( the student was using the most basic of WC techniques, which is obviously all he needed), a sure sign that our fighter was bothering him, otherwise why would a big time trainer be paying attention to a first time fighter in the novice division..

James

131

Originally posted by Becca
[B]There are some in my school, too. Most are very interested in the techniques, but are very good ar disswading the gung-ho that it would stop them if they really wanted to pin you. Then they proceded to show us just how effective they could be against the “anti-grappling”. The only ones who could evade were the ones who were grapplers to begin with.

The only real anti-grappling technique is to not let the sombitches get thier mitts on you in the first place. And that just don’t always work. [/B]

Nothing works 100% of the time, that’s why adapability and interruptability is important, and also why WC puts allot of emphasize on these attributes..

James

132

What was the exact rule?

133

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
[B]“Victor,
The science of WC goes beyond the close quarters fighting techniques that most think. The grappling is there, you just have to see it, and the longer range kicking is there too. Its how the WC system applies it that is different. Like Bruce Lee said, don’t grapple a grappler, don’t kick a kicker…” (sihing)

Never said that the standing chi na arm-locking techniques weren’t there..or the sweeps…or the longer range kicking…

But these things are not the main thrust of the system - and are therefore (especially the “grappling”) limited in scope. No I wouldn’t want to grapple a grappler on the floor (or even in the clinch) just using wing chun - because I wouldn’t have enough in my arsenal for that.

The main focus of wing chun is standup, close quarter, infight striking/trapping/kicking…but mostly the very close range striking.

That doesn’t mean that the other aspects of the art won’t enable the WC fighter to do well at closing from long range (some WC systems anyway)…kick from long range…deal with someone trying to take them down, etc.

But against a VERY HIGHLY SKILLED clinch, grapple, and groundfight guy (and especially one who can disguise his entry behind decent strikes)… WC - by itself - is really going to have it’s hands full - in such a fight WC has no “advantage” at the standing infight range…it’s 50/50 at best, at this point.

I don’t like those odds, Do you?

Hence my advocation of crosstraining…which for me is Catch-as-catch-can wrestling…for other WC people I know it’s BJJ…for others it might be judo…whatever. [/B]

If fighting anyone of High skill from any MA, your hands will be full. Crosstraining by itself for the individual, if they decide to do this, is fine, nothing wrong with adding to your system, just have a base system to build on then go from there. My problem is that lots of people believe you “HAVE” to do this to be effective at combat. The word effective is subjective, but in this context it means against the general public and against the most likely things you will meet in the street confrontation. Of course I would be concerned if I had to take out Mike Tyson, and if I could avoid it I would obviously. My point is that if I had to do this, like if Mike was killing my family, then I would be more effective against him using WC in my opinion. Maybe not so effective if the circumstance was in a competition, just because some are not turned on that way about competitions and such. I’m one of those. But real life is different from competitions as you have no idea who or what your opponent on the street knows of combat and fighting. To be successful you have to take him out fast or else risk getting defeated, and IMO WC does this the best. It’s just my opinion and anyone is free to disagree. Peace…

James

134

Originally posted by SevenStar
What was the exact rule?

I don’t know the exact rule. I can only guess that because it was a first timers event that they implemented the “too aggressive” rule. The point is the WC guy did quite well against the MT guys of similar experience.

James

135

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q="Mike+Myles"%2Bmuay+thai%2Bcalgary&btnG=Search

136

sorry, try Mike Miles, without the “y”.

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=Mike+Miles+"calgary"&meta=

137

Originally posted by sihing

Sihing: so its okay for you to believe what you believe and be right but not the other way around for others with different opinions, and you call yourself a Moderator??? Low standard on this forum I must say…

you are free to believe what you want. However, this is a public forum, and when you post what you believe, you can expect it to be challenged. Welcome to internet 101. Second, you really have no experience with other styles, so when I hear opinions such as yours vs. those of anerlich, UWC and others on the forum, whom do you think I’d see as more credible on such topics?

Sihing: maybe, but not to all

to enough that the arts has the general rep that is does today.

and this is where I see your tunnel vision towards your own belief’s.

what tunnel vision? I was in TMA prior to doing what I do now. I don’t have tunnel vision for mma, but when someone who has not trained in anything other than wc makes statements like “In the end IMO, if one puts the hard work in MT vs. WC, the WC man/woman will win in a fight”, the BS meter goes off. Not only that, but it shows YOUR tunnel vision. Even your fellow WC brethren are disagreeing with you.

Not if the requirements of that system are strength and speed based.

we’ve had this discussion several times on the wc forum. The arts you are referring to use all of the same attributes you say wc teaches - timing, distancing, angling, etc. This is basic and should be inherent to all MA styles.

I totally agree with proper training practices. One that doesn’t train enough throughout their MA career will have less skills for sure, but if the training intensity is the same btw two individuals from different arts then what determines the more effective art.

and with this you are implying that wc is more effective? Here goes the tunnel vision again…

Things like individual will and heart and toughness are not a accurate measuring tools as these attributes vary to many degrees in people and depends also on the situation where combat is needed, and cannot be trained to any high degree. Either you have heart and will or you don’t.

This I agree with.

IMO the art with more effective/efficient movements is overall a more effective art.

This I disagre with. If your effective movements aren’t trained in a proper and efficient manner, how much good will they do you?

You wouldn’t believe me if I did come back with positive results in my favor, so what’s the use.

That’s not true at all. You don’t strike me as a compulsive liar, so what reason would I have to disbelieve you?

Plus I feel no need to prove to you or anyone what my effectiveness is.

It’s not really about proving it, IMO. at some point in time, I think that all MA should test themselves. The ring is ideal for that. Some type of outside testing. Heck, go to taiji legacy and enter shuai chiao. Enter a san da tournament. doesn’t matter what, but IMO should be done at some point.

I’ve said many times on this forum that I’m not a “fighter” but have very good self-defense abilities. I’d rather be a warrior anyways, as fighters need to constantly prove themselves, warriors don’t.

Umm… unless you’ve been in a war, you can never be considered a WARrior. and fighters don’t fight because they have to prove themselves. Fighters fight because they like to fight. That’s what’s in them. Heck, I lost my last fight. I have no problem saying that. If I was out to prove something, I wouldn’t be proud to say that. But losing happens. a fighter fights because it is in them to do so.

138

which one was miles - the ref, the sponsor or the trainer that went up to your guy?

139

Miles went up to our guy. The sponsor of the event.

140

if his interview of joe lewis reflects his feelings at all, he doesn’t think too highly of wing chun:

http://www.mikemiles.com/people/interviews/lewis.cfm

his gym in southeast calgary teaches CMA though…