Thinking outside the box

[sihing]

@Knifefighter

I agree with ADD… a grappler will normally be less mobile than a striker. Strikers can exploit this to their advantage, but most don’t really know how to do so (as ADD demonstrates in his response to the theoretical “grappler attack” scenario).

I also partially agree with James. The neutral stance (or square stance in wrestling terms) is the best defensive posture for takedown prevention. However, it also limits your ability to strike effectively, makes it easier for your opponent to strike you, and is renderered pretty much inneffective if you use it with your toes pointed inward and your upper body erect. You will see a lot of wrestlers use a square stance in wrestling competitions, but they pretty much throw it out when they enter MMA competitions.

Yes I would agree too if I did advocate pigeon toed stances, but I don’t. Our Neurtral stance either has the feet pointed 45 deg left or right (depending on the lead guard) with the feet a little wider than shoulder width apart, so lateral mobility is very easy from this stance, see this mag article for more details http://www.kickstartmag.ca/online_magazine/ page 17, my Sihing wrote it. As for striking this is the defensive posture only, used outside kicking range, forward type stances are used once contact has been made to strike with and advance forward. Also once trained with and understood, it is just as easy to defend strikes as when in a forward type stance.

James

[sihing]

@Ultimatewingchun

“WC has a complete arsenal against ALL types of attacks, just because some here cannot apply it or do not understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.” (James)

***SPOKEN by someone who has how much experience actually fighting/sparring against good grapplers?

Oh, I see…little to no experience.

Okay. Yeah…right! :rolleyes:

…

Well from your last presentation of Vids, your philosophy hasn’t helped you either Vic. SO GO GET YOUR SHINE BOX!! lol..

James

[canglong]

But consider this, Tony (canglong): even though I’m sure William Cheung wouldn’t openly admit it…Why do you think he was actually teaching such a move (since it’s clearly not wing chun) - if he really thought the TWC system was complete?
In your mind what are the distinctions that seperate techniques that are “clearly” wing chun and those that are not.

[Airdrawndagger]

Martial arts are very individualistic. You cannot rely on anyone other than yourself when you are in a fight. That being said, how can I rely on what 1,2, or 3 people say about a system of kung fu when personal performance is ultimately responsible for the outcome of a situation?
Sure, that person can have “experience” in fighting say a grappler, but if that person losses the fight then is the method in which he choses to fight the reason for failure, or does it have to do with one or many ways in which he practices that method of fighting?
Even if I lose 10 times in a row to different grapplers is it because my style of fighting is not apted enough to handle grappling as a art, or am I doing something wrong? Am I not fully understanding the system? Am I not practicing enough to hone my skills? Am I not in shape enough? Did I handle the “fear” factor in a way which hindered my abilities? Did I underestimate my apponent? Was my timing off? Was I not quick enough?
These type of questions have more to do with an outcome of a situation then “Well I lost because Wing Chun is not a complete system”. There needs to be some accountability for ones actions.

[unkokusai]

@Airdrawndagger

?
Even if I lose 10 times in a row to different grapplers is it because my style of fighting is not apted enough to handle grappling as a art, or am I doing something wrong? Am I not fully understanding the system? Am I not practicing enough to hone my .

What if ten WCers lose ten times in a row? What would you conclude then?

[Airdrawndagger]

What if?

Do we really want to go down the “what if” road?
What if 100 grapplers lost to 1 wing chun man?
What if 100 grapplers fought 100 WC’ers?
What if I caught a bullet between my teeth?

Not to much else I care to comment on about that…

[unkokusai]

@Airdrawndagger

What if?

Do we really want to go down the “what if” road?
…

Well you sure don’t. It would seem that you don’t want to ever entertain the notion that your WC ain’t gettin’ it done, no matter what evidence may come.

[sihing]

@canglong

In your mind what are the distinctions that seperate techniques that are “clearly” wing chun and those that are not.

This is a good question Tony. When people start saying things like “Oh, that is definetly not a WC move” what exactly does that mean. There are all kinds of movements that can be contrived from the system that do not resemble Tan, Bon or Fok Sao, lol.

We address shoots, mounting positions and all that kinda of stuff totally using WC movements, and concepts/techniques, so to say that they are not there or that one has to go outside the system, is just afraid to admit they lack total knowledge of the system they claim to teach and fight with.

As for GM Cheung and his ways of dealing with things, let me put it this way, sometimes not all things are exposed to those that pay for a seminar, or another way sometimes all know Grandmasters do not know it all or the right way of things. Some of the reasons we do things differently than the TWC way is simply things where not being done as per the concept of the system taught by the
GM himself, sloppiness if you ask me and a preoccupation with business instead of quality is the reason for this. Just my opinion, take it or leave it.

James

[Airdrawndagger]

@unkokusai

Well you sure don’t. It would seem that you don’t want to ever entertain the notion that your WC ain’t gettin’ it done, no matter what evidence may come.

No I sure dont. Asking such arbitrary questions as “what if” requires an arbitrary answer that is neither substantial nor is it a practical means to support a point. So what sort of “evidence” do you wish to bring to the table other than your thought provoking “what if” banter? “WC ain’t gettin’ it done” …Zzzzz thats a real convincing argument you got there lil’ tiger.

[unkokusai]

@Airdrawndagger

No I sure dont. Asking such arbitrary questions as “what if” requires an arbitrary answer that is neither substantial nor is it a practical means to support a point. So what sort of “evidence” do you wish to bring to the table other than your thought provoking “what if” banter? “WC ain’t gettin’ it done” …Zzzzz thats a real convincing argument you got there lil’ tiger.

Your defensiveness speaks volumes. I wasn’t making any “argument” other than to point out your unreasonable bias.

It seems that there is nothing that would shake your belief that WC is all you need. Yes or no?

[Ultimatewingchun]

“But consider this, Tony (canglong): even though I’m sure William Cheung wouldn’t openly admit it…Why do you think he was actually teaching such a move (since it’s clearly not wing chun) - if he really thought the TWC system was complete?” (Victor)

“In your mind what are the distinctions that seperate techniques that are “clearly” wing chun and those that are not.” (Tony)

***A man shoots for your lead leg, and wraps his arms around it, but before he can pull it up and keep on driving forward to unbalance you - and take you to the ground - you push your weight completely forward (100%) to the front leg that he’s grabbing…while bending over him and wrapping both your arms around his torso. This is the move that William Cheung taught that Anerlich was alluding to.

Now Tony, YOU TELL ME where in that move you see any wing chun?

…

And in a related post about this…the following was mentioned:

“As for GM Cheung and his ways of dealing with things, let me put it this way, sometimes not all things are exposed to those that pay for a seminar, or another way sometimes all know Grandmasters do not know it all or the right way of things. Some of the reasons we do things differently than the TWC way is simply things where not being done as per the concept of the system taught by the
GM himself, sloppiness if you ask me and a preoccupation with business instead of quality is the reason for this. Just my opinion, take it or leave it.” (James)

***WHAT hypocrisy!!! The same man who makes this statement also admits that he doesn’t spar with the students who attend his sifu’s school - who he helps teach; and he has also told us (in the past) that his sifu doesn’t spar with the students either - and in fact discourages it. And of course the same for crosstraining. THESE FACTS ARE ABOUT “BUSINESS” ALSO!!!

For some people - it’s not good for “business” (if the goal is to have a McDojo) to spar with students (or do some crosstraining either)…since the result might be that the students begin to see that the “sihing” and the “sifu” aren’t untouchable martial art wizards after all.

Perhaps it would be better to stick to the prearranged two man sparring drills as a demo in the neighborhood shopping mall.

…

And finally, there’s this:

“Sure, that person can have ‘experience’ in fighting say a grappler, but if that person losses the fight then is the method in which he choses to fight the reason for failure, or does it have to do with one or many ways in which he practices that method of fighting?
Even if I lose 10 times in a row to different grapplers is it because my style of fighting is not apted enough to handle grappling as a art, or am I doing something wrong? Am I not fully understanding the system? Am I not practicing enough to hone my skills?” (ADD)

***WHY am I not surprised at these remarks? If I beat the grappler then my wing chun has the answers - and is therefore a complete system (and I don’t have to consider doing any crosstraining)…and if I (or Victor) get taken down by a grappler - even if it happens to me 10 times…IT STILL DOESN’T MEAN THAT IT’S A MISSING ELEMENT WITHIN THE SYSTEM THAT IS THE ROOT CAUSE:rolleyes:

It’s me (or it’s Victor)…or it’s this guy or that guy.

But never the system

Because the system is my religion - and I have faith in it - and in those who have instructed me (and those who have instructed them).

I think I’ve had just about enough of this thread.

[sihing]

@Ultimatewingchun

“But consider this, Tony (canglong): even though I’m sure William Cheung wouldn’t openly admit it…Why do you think he was actually teaching such a move (since it’s clearly not wing chun) - if he really thought the TWC system was complete?” (Victor)

“In your mind what are the distinctions that seperate techniques that are “clearly” wing chun and those that are not.” (Tony)

***A man shoots for your lead leg, and wraps his arms around it, but before he can pull it up and keep on driving forward to unbalance you - and take you to the ground - you push your weight completely forward (100%) to the front leg that he’s grabbing…while bending over him and wrapping both your arms around his torso. This is the move that William Cheung taught that Anerlich was alluding to.

Now Tony, YOU TELL ME where in that move you see any wing chun?

…

And in a related post about this…the following was mentioned:

“As for GM Cheung and his ways of dealing with things, let me put it this way, sometimes not all things are exposed to those that pay for a seminar, or another way sometimes all know Grandmasters do not know it all or the right way of things. Some of the reasons we do things differently than the TWC way is simply things where not being done as per the concept of the system taught by the
GM himself, sloppiness if you ask me and a preoccupation with business instead of quality is the reason for this. Just my opinion, take it or leave it.” (James)

***WHAT hypocrisy!!! The same man who makes this statement also admits that he doesn’t spar with the students who attend his sifu’s school - who he helps teach; and he has also told us (in the past) that his sifu doesn’t spar with the students either - and in fact discourages it. And of course the same for crosstraining. THESE FACTS ARE ABOUT “BUSINESS” ALSO!!!

For some people - it’s not good for “business” (if the goal is to have a McDojo) to spar with students (or do some crosstraining either)…since the result might be that the students begin to see that the “sihing” and the “sifu” aren’t untouchable martial art wizards after all.

Perhaps it would be better to stick to the prearranged two man sparring drills as a demo in the neighborhood shopping mall.

…

And finally, there’s this:

“Sure, that person can have ‘experience’ in fighting say a grappler, but if that person losses the fight then is the method in which he choses to fight the reason for failure, or does it have to do with one or many ways in which he practices that method of fighting?
Even if I lose 10 times in a row to different grapplers is it because my style of fighting is not apted enough to handle grappling as a art, or am I doing something wrong? Am I not fully understanding the system? Am I not practicing enough to hone my skills?” (ADD)

***WHY am I not surprised at these remarks? If I beat the grappler then my wing chun has the answers - and is therefore a complete system (and I don’t have to consider doing any crosstraining)…and if I (or Victor) get taken down by a grappler - even if it happens to me 10 times…IT STILL DOESN’T MEAN THAT IT’S A MISSING ELEMENT WITHIN THE SYSTEM THAT IS THE ROOT CAUSE:rolleyes:

It’s me (or it’s Victor)…or it’s this guy or that guy.

But never the system

Because the system is my religion - and I have faith in it - and in those who have instructed me (and those who have instructed them).

I think I’ve had just about enough of this thread.

Of course you’ve had enough of this thread, because you can’t refute any of it, so the typical response it to what, RUN AWAY…Well I guess for you Victor it’s back to the old reliable, Sparring threads…lol..

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Did you say run away???

You… …Who didn’t have the balls to come to Cleveland…who backed out of it once he realized what his big mouth was getting him into? :eek:

Cut the bull5hit…will you please?

You’re kidding nobody.

[Airdrawndagger]

@unkokusai

Your defensiveness speaks volumes. I wasn’t making any “argument” other than to point out your unreasonable bias.

It seems that there is nothing that would shake your belief that WC is all you need. Yes or no?

Yes I am very defensive about wing chun because it is a big part of my life. I dont care how anyone practices MA but to put down WC just isn’t cool in my book. Yes I believe that WC has a answer for any form of hand to hand combat.

[Airdrawndagger]

@Ultimatewingchun

Cut the bull5hit…will you please?

You’re kidding nobody.

Victor:
I think that from time to time you make very good points in your post. You have trained the way you do because you feel that that is the best way for YOU to train right? Well this is the best way for ME to train. I never dis credit anything that you say, but where I draw the line is when people(not just you) start to say that our system is incomplete because they are cross-training.
Why can’t you say that you LIKE to cross train because you are interested in other MA’s. There’s nothing wrong with that. I like to study and practice other MA as well but only to learn and grow as a MAist. BUT i do NOT train in other martial arts because WC is incomplete. How can make such an argument when I haven’t learned all there is to learn in this system? There is nobody out there (asside from MAYBE a handful of people) that can say that they have totally mastered WC. There is always something new to learn, practice, perfect, sharpen, and train.

[Edmund]

@Airdrawndagger

I would like to think that a wrestler would be less mobile and more excepting to being grappled because that is their comfortzone. Going to the ground is what a wrestler wants to do. I would prefer to stay on my feet.

As would most people in a life or death situation. The nature of fighting however often means you eventually make contact and it’s difficult to break. WC is one of the more realistic arts by acknowledging that close fighting is pretty important and training it.

I’d agree most wrestlers are more accepting of being grappled. In a sporting wrestling match, avoiding contact or stepping back too much will quite quickly generate a penalty for passivity which is why it is not seen very often.

But fighting mobility could also be in the sense that wrestlers are quick to move themselves into a defensive position rather than moving around a great distance. When someone attempts to take them down AND can get in on their leg they can essentially get the tackler in a broken down position by moving their own weight, moving their other leg, or reaching over the back to grab the tacklers leg etc.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Victor:
I think that from time to time you make very good points in your post. You have trained the way you do because you feel that that is the best way for YOU to train right? Well this is the best way for ME to train. I never discredit anything that you say, but where I draw the line is when people (not just you) start to say that our system is incomplete because they are cross-training.

Why can’t you say that you LIKE to cross-train because you are interested in other MA’s. There’s nothing wrong with that. I like to study and practice other MA as well but only to learn and grow as a MAist. BUT I do NOT train in other martial arts because WC is incomplete. How can I make such an argument when I haven’t learned all there is to learn in this system? There is nobody out there (asside from MAYBE a handful of people) that can say that they have totally mastered WC. There is always something new to learn, practice, perfect, sharpen, and train." (Airdrawndagger)

***LET me throw that back at you, ADD. But before doing so, I’ll say this: you’re certainly entitled to your beliefs, especially since you’re seemingly honest about the fact that you have a psychological investment of a sort in maintaining your faith that wing chun has all the answers to combat. There are many people who won’t admit even that much.

However, getting back to your post that I’ve quoted above: I’m not saying that wing chun is incomplete because I’m crosstraining. And I’m not saying that I crosstrain because “I’m interested” in other martial arts. I’m saying that I’ve been doing wing chun for 30 YEARS…and I’m crosstraining only within the last 5-6-7 years or so - PRECISELY BECAUSE I’VE FOUND WING CHUN TO BE INCOMPLETE. So I gave the system a serious look for about 25 years before coming to the final conclusion that there will be times when:

A) You WILL be forced to grapple because going to the ground was unavoidable, or because in the standup aspect of the fight the other guy forced the fight to a standing clinch.

B) You WILL have to use longer range footwork, striking, and kicking moves that aren’t normally associated with wing chun - because you will need the mobility that up-on-your-toes footwork provides, and because you will need the longer range striking and kicking that arts like boxing and kickboxing provide (as a means to bridge the gap, make hits, open up lines, and get close enough to certain quality fighters to form a bridge - so that you can start using the wing chun close quarter game with success).

[unkokusai]

@Airdrawndagger

Yes I am very defensive about wing chun because it is a big part of my life. I dont care how anyone practices MA but to put down WC just isn’t cool in my book. Yes I believe that WC has a answer for any form of hand to hand combat.

And that is exactly what the "what if"s were intended to bring to the fore. Your blind allegiance to WC is your undoing.

Its just silly and irrational.

[unkokusai]

@Airdrawndagger

BUT i do NOT train in other martial arts because WC is incomplete. How can make such an argument when I haven’t learned all there is to learn in this system? .

Wtf man. Are you hanging around airports and bus stations handing out literature for this religion of yours?

[anerlich]

Do you have the email address?

No, Tony, I don’t. But surely your contacts at the VT Museum will.

Failing that, I’m sure a resourceful boy such as you could find GM Cheung’s website and contact details.