Weng Chun download clip

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
61

Wayfaring,

Three points -

  1. The “evidence” that really matters IMO is what you personally can do, your own performance level. It doesn’t matter if you are following the “best” training method or using the “best” martial art or from the “best” lineage if they aren’t providing you with what you need to increase your fighting performance level. If you believe (hypothetical you and hypothetical belief) that your training is working, my question is “how do you know”? That seems rather simple. Since we are training to be better fighters (WCK is a fighting method), how can we know if our training is working or if our training is increasing our (fighting) performance level or our rate of “growth” and all the associated things, if we aren’t fighting? And fighting better and better opponents? Do you suggest we know these things by conjecture or by extrapolation? By how well we can do drills? Or do you take your sifu’s word for it? How? It seems to me that anything other than fighting would be relying on theory.

Let’s say you believe you grasp the meaning behind the “WCK concepts” or some movement in the forms. How do you know that your interpretation is valid? Because cooperative practice seems to bear you out? Lots of things – including pure crap – work in cooperative practice. So how do you know your view is valid in fighting? Maybe you used it successfully “in the street”. OK, do you think that means it will work against someone skilled or with good attributes? How do you know? How? It seems to be that anything other than fighting would be relying on theory.

Some people will respond by saying that what they are doing is “traditional”, that is, it has worked in the past for our ancestors. OK, perhaps. But how do we know it will work for us? And at what level? How? It seems to be that anything other than fighting would be relying on theory.

So my point is that if we’re not fighting, how can we know? Perhaps you’ll take the time to explain that to me.

FWIW, I don’t care if someone believes that meditating, doing hei gung, doing thousands of reps of the forms, whatever, will make them a better fighter – my question is “how do you know that’s true?” And if they have proof it does, hell, I’ll start doing it!

  1. I’m also pointing out that if we look at those people today that really do fight at a higher level regardless of their method/style/art, and we look at how they train, what we see is that they have a different training model than what most are doing in WCK (or traditional arts). Moreover, we see that not just the higher level people in those arts are doing those things, but that’s how everyone in those methods train. So we know from this evidence that this training model works – it produces results, increases performance levels significantly. Can anyone disagree with that? IMO that’s incontrovertable. Now, WCK and many TCMAs don’t, for the most part, follow that training model. So the logical question is does the WCK training model produce the same sort of results the more modern training method do? I don’t beleive it does. However, I’m open to the possiblity that it may. If it does, shouldn’t someone who uses that training model be able to provide the evidence of higher-level results? And not historical evidence because those stories can be embellished. But evidence that this sort of training model used by trainees today produces results comparable to the more modern training methods. If it does, shouldn’t we expect to see those results? So why haven’t we? Perhaps you’ll take the time to explain that to me.

  2. For some reason folks like you and others seem to think that the validity of my views rest on my personal performance level. It doesn’t. Whether I can swim or not, or how well I can swim, has no bearing on the issue that one needs to get in the water to learn to swim or to become a better swimmer. I can be a nonswimmer and that proposition is still true. I can point out that all good swimmers get in the water, and that’s how they became good swimmers. My getting in the pool doesn’t bear on the validity of that. Why? Because I can point to any good swimmer – ANY ONE – as evidence. And not only any one, but everyone! I can also say, if someone believes you can be a good swimmer without getting in the water, show me a good swimmer that hasn’t (which is the evidence that training method works) – again that has no bearing on my personal swimming skills. Hell, it doesn’t even matter if I practice WCK – the evidence of which training model works is right before our eyes (if you bother to open them). Perhaps you’ll take the time to explain to me why the validity of my views even depend on whether or not I practice WCK.

62

Yes, but nobody on here is saying that swimming on dry land is swimming? We all realize that you have to get into the water to learn how to swim Terence, but you do not seem to acknowledge this. IMO, doing forms alone will not give you great combat/self defense abilities, you have to combine it with the drills, the chi-sao, the sparring, the meditation, etc, to be able to use the WC you are learning in a fighting environment. All of these things listed above alone will not suffice, although some of the things are more critical in the process.

As for “How do you know if you have the skill” type of questions, first off you have to be truthful with yourself. Second you have to test it. When someone test’s it in class is that less credible than testing it against other’s outside of your particular school? Maybe, maybe not. Testing is testing in my mind, and when I tell a student to attack me with all they got, they will do it. In the end, if one truly puts their heart and soul into it, they will gain skill in fighting as compared to when they first started, but not everyone will be a high caliber, unless of course they make it a top priority. One of the advantages of being a teacher of WC, rather than just a practitioner is I have taught hundreds upon hundreds of people, and no matter what you do or how you teach them some will pick it up like so easily and progress through the system with flying colors, becoming great practitioners of WC with high quality self defense/fighting abilities, while others will not as they don’t put their heart and soul into it. I can’t choose who becomes what, as I can only teach them the concepts and techniques of the WC I teach, they have to decide how important it is to them, and make it a priority if they want it badly enough. Also, who does one have to prove it too? And if they prove their skills to one person will they have to prove it to another? Awhile back on this forum, some people mentioned about Sifu’s that don’t accept challenges. Well it comes down to this, if someone comes in to the school and challenges me, and we fight and I defeat this person, what was proven? That I can defeat another in combat? So what, who cares anyways. But next week another stranger comes in and wants to find out if I have any skill, do I have to fight him also? How many times do I have to go through this process, and why would I. Because someone with an ego problem makes me? I don’t think so, the day that someone else controls your actions is the day you will become a slave to another’s opinion, and if that is the case you will be a busy fighter, proving nothing to nobody.

James

63

Terence,

My point is I don’t think you have any genuine training experience with the NHB training methods that produce top NHB fighters. You haven’t trained with Lion’s Den or Team Quest or anyone else like that. But you talk about NHB training methods incessantly.

So, in other words, in terms of your favorite analogy, you are a tidal wading pool occupant on one beach criticizing and ridiculing all the dry land swimmers on another beach for not swimming.

Now if you were saying “My cross-training in BJJ shows me this modification I need to make to my WCK entry to prevent this takedown”, or “My cross-training in Muy Thai has taught me to keep my lead leg less extended in a fighting stance” that’s one thing. But you’re challenging everyone on what skilled NHB fighters they’ve “realistically fought against” as validation of their training. And you haven’t done that either.

But really on top of that I think this type of behavior is starting to drive away some people who really like WCK and want to train it in the best way they can, which is why I’m speaking up about it.

Your overall intent I actually agree with. I think WCK schools ought to fight more. I actually really like the standard BJJ school class format of 1/3 conditioning, 1/3 technique, and 1/3 rolling. It’s a great training blend. I think many get hung up on the words “fight” or “spar”. So let’s define it in a fashion where people can do it and get in better condition, not get hurt, continually test themselves and each other, and advance progressively.

And yes, if I’m ever out in MO, I’d stop in and roll with you, without any testosterone or anything to prove, just to mix it up and have a great time training.

Rgds,
Dave