[QUOTE=Pacman;1005299]there are lots of videos out there. if the only evidence you consider valid is winning an MMA fight, that is another thing.[/QUOTE]
What I consider good evidence is seeing someone able to make what they do – WCK or whatever – work against good, skilled fighters. Isn’t this the standard for any competitive activity? How can you say someone is a good chessplayer or a good tennis player or good wrestler? That they can hold their own against good, proven skilled people.
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1005354]I’ve seen boxing matches won where there was not even one uppercut used, where there were no body shots, etc. Does that disqualify it as boxing? I don’t know your history so please take no offense, but I must ask if you’ve ever competed.[/QUOTE]
This sort of misses the point.
Boxers may not use every single move in their arsenal of movement in a particular match, BUT all their movement in any match is all boxing movement. The move in their boxing matches just like they train to move.
[QUOTE=duende;1005349]People too often judge things by shapes and techniques. If they don’t see a Tan sau in the mix, then somehow that translates for them as not being WC.
When in fact the real beauty of WC is in understanding and expressing WC’s core principles… Principles based on facing and range (TIME), occupation of space and key positioning (SPACE), and structural energy, rooting, and leverage (ENERGY)
Oddly enough, it is this same shape and technique thinking by certain “WC Experts” on this board that makes communication and sharing so difficult at times.
Anyways… nice post.[/QUOTE]
This is all nonsense.
In the martial arts, we train to move in certain ways to accomplish certain tasks. If you don’t practice doing this (here is the task, now practice doing it), you won’t be able to move that way to accomplish your goals. Having a principle in mind won’t translate to good movement – you need to practice the movement itself. If you practice some movement but then when fighting use another movement, how is this good training?
You could say that tennis is really just “understanding and expressing tennis’ core principles… Principles based on facing and range (TIME), occupation of space and key positioning (SPACE), and structural energy, rooting, and leverage (ENERGY)” too. But that’s all bullsh1t. Looking at tennis from thatn perspective won’t help you develop as a player. It’s not just that you do these things but HOW (physically) you do them, whether you are accomplishing your objectives, if you are able to use your tools (techniques), etc.
A forehand drive is a part/tool of tennis, just as a tan sao is a part/tool of WCK.
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;1005273]When WC works successfully (at least against someone who is skilled, conditioned, and knows something about striking, groundfighting, and takedowns), it will look pretty much like you saw in the clip. Changing the rules and getting rid of the equipment will not change anything at all. The old no-rules vale tudo fights pretty much showed that fighting looks pretty much the same when it is trained multi-discipline fighter vs. trained multi-discipline fighter.
Theoretical, fantasy, non-fighters who have never gone full contact against another person with multi-discipline skills will probably never understand this, however.[/QUOTE]
true very true i remember the old no rules days and the fights looked exactly like they do today, only much wilder and less skilled
[QUOTE=Pacman;1005299]there are lots of videos out there. if the only evidence you consider valid is winning an MMA fight, that is another thing.[/QUOTE]
really? not being an a$s but where are they, because outside of alot of demos and guys showing how it should be done no one has posted any actual fight footage (MMA, shanshu, street fighting or even full contact sparring) showing real wing chun in action that people agree is real wing chun and a good example of the style in use perhaps you can?
[QUOTE=Lee Chiang Po;1005306]This is my point. It is a ruleset and an environment. In order to compete there everyone has to adopt and adapt. They end up with the same ruleset so they pretty much end up having to use the same fighting techniques and methods as everyone else. I can not and probably never could compete in the ring, as it is with most everyone else. We have exceptional individuals that shine there, and a whole bunch of other people that really want to. A gung fu system is designed to be used in a way as to make you equal to others as best as possible. In the ruleset environment of MMA you also have to be extremely fit in order to compete with any real expectations. Just look at the top fighters in MMA today. Would you have any prayer of a chance in beating any one of them? No. Most of us wouldn’t. Some of them got caught shooting steriods to make them stronger. This is the key with MMA. Learning and skill are following far behind physical training and strength training. In order to get a fellow into an arm bar, kemora? You have to be stronger than he is in order to force the arm into position and hold it. And if you are not strong enough it won’t happen, or he just might force his arm out of it. Just look at all the top guys. They are all well above average in what they do. Everyone else is just wishing. You can not reasonably expect any none sport fighting system to be able to do anything in such an environment.[/QUOTE]
My lord do you really believe all this, you need to think through your sentences before posting them this is wrong on so many levels it’s not even funny :eek:
[QUOTE=Frost;1005414]My lord do you really believe all this, you need to think through your sentences before posting them this is wrong on so many levels it’s not even funny :eek:[/QUOTE]
You have just expressed my sentiments for 97% of all posts on this forum!
[QUOTE=Frost;1005411]really? not being an a$s but where are they, because outside of alot of demos and guys showing how it should be done no one has posted any actual fight footage (MMA, shanshu, street fighting or even full contact sparring) showing real wing chun in action that people agree is real wing chun and a good example of the style in use perhaps you can?[/QUOTE]
I think he said the clips of Phil’s guys are good examples of WC being used.
[QUOTE=Frost;1005414]My lord do you really believe all this, you need to think through your sentences before posting them this is wrong on so many levels it’s not even funny :eek:[/QUOTE]
You pretty much have to disregard everything that guy posts because he is clearly posting from a fantasy, made-up world view.
[QUOTE=Frost;1005414]My lord do you really believe all this, you need to think through your sentences before posting them this is wrong on so many levels it’s not even funny :eek:[/QUOTE]
Obviously LCP has chain blasted the correct and shattered your little glass world of MMA !!!
Don’t hate !!
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;1005418]You pretty much have to disregard everything that guy posts because he is clearly posting from a fantasy, made-up world view.[/QUOTE]
I will say it again – You have just expressed my sentiments for 97% of all posts on this forum!
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1005419]Obviously LCP has chain blasted the correct and shattered your little glass world of MMA !!!
Don’t hate !!
:D[/QUOTE]
i have never seen so much rubbish in one post before it is mesing eith my mind thats true:eek:
[QUOTE=Frost;1005421]i have never seen so much rubbish in one post before it is mesing eith my mind thats true:eek:[/QUOTE]
You need to get out in the WC forums more !
From the Chi Sau thread…
[QUOTE=chusauli;1005178]I get dynamic weight training. I am always to striving to get a person’s weight on top of me, so I can manipulate it, guide it, control it, throw it and set up linked strikes from the manipulation.
WCK is based on indexing for tools - that is whatever fits in the gates at that moment, given the time and position relative to the opponent.
There are no fixed stances, only balance. There is no form/shape, only body structure in the moment. There are no hand techniques, only dealing with energy, which creates these moments in time that people call techniques.[/QUOTE]
Sound familiar anyone?? Sure sounds like an interpetation of HFY Time, Space, and Energy concept to me!
But then we get the back track…
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1005391]
You could say that tennis is really just “understanding and expressing tennis’ core principles… Principles based on facing and range (TIME), occupation of space and key positioning (SPACE), and structural energy, rooting, and leverage (ENERGY)” too. But that’s all bullsh1t. Looking at tennis from thatn perspective won’t help you develop as a player. It’s not just that you do these things but HOW (physically) you do them, whether you are accomplishing your objectives, if you are able to use your tools (techniques), etc.
A forehand drive is a part/tool of tennis, just as a tan sao is a part/tool of WCK.[/QUOTE]
Come on guys… this good cop, bad cop routine is getting really old.
[QUOTE=bennyvt;1005366]i think it comes down to why certain things are used. Like the hook punches, were they done for a vt reason. Ie closest distance, going around a block etc. Or was he just throwing hooks. Using vt is about using the most simple technique to make the most damage. Not doing something them justifing it by saying but they do hooks in bj. I watched the orrh video series and most was ok but alot was bjj etc justified using vt ideas. There is on gulliten in bj. Even the guy i learn shoot off said it was just bjj. Don’t get me wrong, nothing wrong with mixing stuff to be a complete fighter but don’t call a rear naked choke a vt move, way have been the best way of beating him but it wasn’t vt.[/QUOTE]
That’s why I worded it the way I did. I would add that the strikes chosen should be those that are the most economical in terms of risk. Biggest payout with the least amount of risk.
A hook punch is described as a “tight C”. I’ve also heard it called a “tight L” as it’s still a straight punch–just coming from the side.
Within a WC mindset hook punches (if keeping in line with all its guidelines) should only be thrown when at that particular moment in time it is more economical and logical. So for example like you said going around a strong block instead of trying to move it. If someone has a much stronger arm than you are able to manipulate–what’s more economical–trying to unsuccessfully slap it around to punch directly through the tunnel or just punch around it? A similar example would be because he’s covering up through the middle and your arm is on the outside–the most natural and economical punch is the hook.
So you use the punch as you see fit to reap the benefits with as little risk as possible. It’s right there in the forms–so why not use it to its maximum potential? When I spar, I don’t sit there and pummel someone with chain punches while they’re covering. I vary the punches, hit different targets, from different angles…why? Because it’s the smarter thing to do. You keep throwing chain punches the other guys gonna know that and adapt very quickly.
As to the rest of it, yea, I agree that any grappling is a byproduct of their mma / bjj training. Otherwise WC would have been doing that stuff all along. It’s not there’s been an epiphany of the wing chun forms, its that some of the stuff is (by a looong stretch) being related to wing chun’s forms.
Kinda like how people try to fit all the stuff going on in the world to prophecies told by people thousands of years ago. It could fit, but it doesn’t mean that it was meant to.
Duende,
I write my own stuff - not play good cop or bad cop. And my stuff is not an interpretation of HFY. Your view is this.
We live in a 4-D world: height, width, depth and time, so its all slivers of reality, (perhaps this is branding, too).
Your TSE theories seem to be Wave Theory related to what Einstein postulated and a cross between Buddhist theories.
[QUOTE=chusauli;1005478]Duende,
I write my own stuff - not play good cop or bad cop. And my stuff is not an interpretation of HFY. Your view is this.
We live in a 4-D world: height, width, depth and time, so its all slivers of reality, (perhaps this is branding, too).
Your TSE theories seem to be Wave Theory related to what Einstein postulated and a cross between Buddhist theories.[/QUOTE]
And if you did borrow… no one should care.
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1005385]What I consider good evidence is seeing someone able to make what they do – WCK or whatever – work against good, skilled fighters. Isn’t this the standard for any competitive activity? How can you say someone is a good chessplayer or a good tennis player or good wrestler? That they can hold their own against good, proven skilled people.[/QUOTE]
im not saying that. ive seen it and experienced it. many others here have too, but the only way you’ll believe it is if you see it happen on spike TV. i understand your skepticism of others, and thats fine, but you have to acknowledge that just because you havent seen it in UFC doesnt mean that its bull****. there are other factors
if the gracies had not made their BJJ so public, we probably would not know much about it.
**** you just insulted your sifu. what disrespect!
[QUOTE=duende;1005443]From the Chi Sau thread…
Sound familiar anyone?? Sure sounds like an interpetation of HFY Time, Space, and Energy concept to me!
But then we get the back track…
Come on guys… this good cop, bad cop routine is getting really old.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Knifefighter;1005314]WOW!!! Talk about clueless.[/QUOTE]
Are you refering to you or me? I know that you are an expert on this subject since you actually had a fight, even if you got whipped. And I have seen what you consider fighting skills. Of course I must be absolutely clueless since I was not able to see any remote resemblence of Wing Chun in the video you used to make your point. Did you have someone tell you that it did, or did you actually make that assumption yourself?
I think what you are trying to do here is compare yourself with some of the top fighters of MMA, and I assume that it is supposed to in some way give your opinions credance, but you are not an MMA fighter in any sense of the word, and none of your opinions carry any more weight than mine or anyone elses. When you post videos such as this you need to except what comments are made without your usual flattery. Otherwise give up the effort or find something with a bit more convincing visuals.