# Feelin' down...and a little advice?



## Nyrotic (Sep 11, 2007)

I 
recently went sparring with a couple of my friends. Needless to say, I got the hell beat out of me. I mean, I've been at WC for about 6-7 months now (Been doin' Shaolin-do for about a year and a half before that) and I thought that what little I've learned so far would help me beat a couple of guys who've never had any formal training. Now leaving out my friend who did Tae Kwon Do for 7 years, the other two are just a couple of brothers who've only really ever fought eachother (Both grapplers for the most part). Both of them beat me...well, as far as 'winning' goes in sparring. Basically, I just feel a little down that a system that I have so much faith and trust in didn't pull me through this time. 

Also, I HAVE NOT lost faith in WC. Leaving out the fact that I haven't gone through the whole system, how do we WC'ers practice to fight against grapplers? And for aggresive attackers, is it just a matter of catching them on the first strike?

And note that head shots were not allowed, as we have no gear. Could that ultimately be why I didn't do so hot? I...feel...sad.

-Nyro


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 11, 2007)

An important thing to bear in mind is that 'sparring' with friends is not fighting.  

The study of a martial art has at it's core the concept of inflicting violent conseuqences upon those that attack you.  What essentially devolves as 'play fighting' does not allow you to utilise the techniques you have learned.

Any martial art (well those that I know of) is not about pummeling an opponent into submission but inflicting damage that eliminates their ability to fight.  That sort of thing is not easily replicable in a non-real environment where your aim is not the disabling or the permanent enforcement of non-movement (and is one reason for the skyrocketing reputation of non-Traditional MA because of the much publicised 'cage fighting').


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 11, 2007)

Heck i'd be down too...
Keep ya head up and use it as motivation.  Also talk with your Sifu and see what he says about it.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Sep 11, 2007)

Good to hear you haven't lost faith in WC.  

I think that one of the reasons it appears to have failed you against your friends (apart from those that Sukerkin has already pointed out) is that WC tends to work on something of a 'first in, best dressed' philosophy.  The speed of the strikes really depends on good footwork to do them which usually means getting your shots in first.

Though I have to say, this advice really applies to any art used to combat a grappler.  You need to stop the grapple.  Wing Chun can be very effective at this.


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 11, 2007)

Steel Tiger said:


> I think that one of the reasons it appears to have failed you against your friends (apart from those that Sukerkin has already pointed out) is that WC tends to work on something of a 'first in, best dressed' philosophy. The speed of the strikes really depends on good footwork to do them which usually means getting your shots in first.


 
So WC stresses getting in first for the strike?
If you don't will this compicate things?
So with WC, size doesn't matter but speed does?

Also, do too many WC artists depends on chain punches.  I ask b/c everytime I go to youtube and type in wing chun I always see folks showing how fast they are but more importantly, chain punches are all you see.  Maybe it is just me and soemone can point out better WC clips but all I see are 2 moves and chain punches like crazy.  Is it that heavily impressed upon students?


----------



## Steel Tiger (Sep 11, 2007)

AceHBK said:


> So WC stresses getting in first for the strike?
> If you don't will this compicate things?
> So with WC, size doesn't matter but speed does?
> 
> Also, do too many WC artists depends on chain punches. I ask b/c everytime I go to youtube and type in wing chun I always see folks showing how fast they are but more importantly, chain punches are all you see. Maybe it is just me and soemone can point out better WC clips but all I see are 2 moves and chain punches like crazy. Is it that heavily impressed upon students?


 
I don't know if WC really stresses getting in that first strike, but it is a logical assumption based on the concepts of speed and chain punching you mention. I have never really thought of it as a counter-attacking art, but more as a pre-emptive one.

When fighting a grappler you really only have three options. You can just keep out of range, but you can't mount an offence if you do. You can grapple as well, but that relies on how confident you are in your own grappling skills. Lastly, you can deny them the opportunity to grapple by seizing the initiative. If you're not a grappler and you are engaged you have to hit them first and hard otherwise you'll be in their world and not liking it.

I think that size always matters but WC's history would suggest its not a prime concern. Hand speed is a big deal in WC that's probably why there are so many vids around of chain punching. 

And I don't think those vids are diagnostic of Wing Chun. There is more to the art than just chain punching. There are good low kicking techniques, and the centre-line defence concepts produce very good defensive techniques. 

This is all just my opinion based on conversations with WC practitioners and viewing a number of classes and demonstrations. My own art (bagua) is so different from WC its surprising they come form the same country.

Maybe some of the Wing Chun guys could give us better insights.


----------



## Rabu (Sep 12, 2007)

Right.  Ill give it a go.

From what you have written, it sounds like you were dissapointed in your performance based on your expectation that you would perform at a certain level.  You had this feeling in advance of the matches you had.

Set your expectations more reasonably in future.  Instead of 'I should be able to beat these guys since they have no training' use this kind of thinking 'it will be interesting to see how well my skill has progressed and what I can learn from my matches'.

The reason you are feeling the way you are about your matches would seem to be based on the failure of your expectation.  In effect you already fought your matches and won.

Its fine to be dissapointed in your performance, but be dissapointed for the right reasons.

If you set the right kinds of expectations, or simply have none, you will only have an experience you can learn from no matter what.

If that does not help, try this: picture yourself winning the matches instead of losing.  What is different after the matches that you won vs the matches that you lost?  Is that real?  Or is it another expectation you could do without?

Your friends are still your friends.  You still have the level of skill that you had going in to the matches.  It sounds like nobody was hurt physically.

This sounds like a good experience, if you can seperate the expectations from the lessons and the experience.

Best of luck in your studies!

Best regards,

Rob


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 12, 2007)

Rabu....I agree with you to a certain point.  Where I disagree is having high expectations.  To me if you don't expect anything but the best from yourself then you are in turn short changing yourself.

If he aims extremely high and comes up short he should be content to where he is at but it also shows what he needs to work on and needs to work twice as hard.


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 12, 2007)

Steel Tiger said:


> I don't know if WC really stresses getting in that first strike, but it is a logical assumption based on the concepts of speed and chain punching you mention. I have never really thought of it as a counter-attacking art, but more as a pre-emptive one.
> 
> When fighting a grappler you really only have three options. You can just keep out of range, but you can't mount an offence if you do. You can grapple as well, but that relies on how confident you are in your own grappling skills. Lastly, you can deny them the opportunity to grapple by seizing the initiative. If you're not a grappler and you are engaged you have to hit them first and hard otherwise you'll be in their world and not liking it.
> 
> ...


 

You make some good points.  I guess I always saw WC as more counter attacking MA  due to the principle of deflecting and using their opponents power.

I wish I could see more clips of WC without the 50 million chain punches or people doing chi saio (?) and showing how fast they can move.

I have never seen bagua (unless it has been used in a movie and I didn't know it    I will have to search on youtube then to see what it looks like.

I wonder for all the WC people....is WC that different than from.....Kenpo?  If they are, what are the major differences?  Dpo u feel they share some similarities?


----------



## TheOriginalName (Sep 12, 2007)

I guess something to keep in mind also is that when you are sparring you can do and try things that you would never have done in the real world. 

In the real world situation your training would allow you to control your fear, where as they (without training) may give in to fear. 

Don't get too down.
Analyse what happened 
Learn what you can from it
Then push it aside and move forward.

Best of luck - and keep your chin up!!


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Well, it's very hard to spar and not lose if using WC.  The reason being is that WC is a lawless style and can only be effective if used at full force. 

aceHBK has a good point as to you shouldn't enter a battle with win or lose on your mind.  Simply go in expecting to lose and hoping to win.  After that, stash that thought in the back of your head and don't think about it till after the fight.  Focus on staying relaxed and calm and watch the attack as it approaches.  Chain punches are for the inaccurate and those that don't have enough confidence in their blocking abilities.  You can deliver the same amount of dmg with a single 1 inch punch to the chest, neck or face.

Practice practice practice.  You don't have to believe in WC for it to work.  You just have to do the moves soooo many times that you understand whats going on underneath the muscle.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 12, 2007)

Good stuff Brocklee.... Very true

Also guys - bear in mind that you won't win every fight. Do you think there wasn't a time when Chuck Liddel or Bruce Lee didn't get beaten? 

6-7 months is a very short time in any martial art and you will grow from the experience of a lost fight. 

Wing chun vs. grappling is an odd concept - you have to remember that grapplers do best on the floor, and wing chun guys do best while standing up. So as I have said previously, it is like a fight between a crocodile and a lion. If the lion goes in to the water, he is most likely to get beaten. If a crocodile comes onto land, it will get beaten. 

Similarly, if you get grabbed by a BJJ guy, you will lose. If you keep your feet, then you will win!

The fight therefore is alll about whether it goes to ground or not!

Bear in mind that later on, you will be able to incorperate BJJ into wing chun. People have argued on here about learning good stancework and keeping your feet, and that works okay in a spar. But in a real environment where you migt get grabbed out of the blue, you need to understand what your opponet is looking for. 

I train BJJ and wrestling and it allows me to see what the grappler is looking for and simply not let him do it!

Keep faith - wing chun is a powerful art and as Brocklee said, works best at full force and at street level

If you want to go and spar, learn a sport art


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 12, 2007)

Kamon Guy is correct, from an MMA point of view when we have an opponent who is a a strong grappler we try to keep him standing up and vice versa. There are lots of ways to avoid being taken down, it's not inevitable. One of the reason we have a wide stance in MMA...quite hard for me to change from a karate stance.... is to help avoid the takedowns. As Kamon says, get some BJJ into your training if you can, don't be discouraged whatever your style and theres some really good advice from the guys on here!


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Kamon Guy is correct, from an MMA point of view when we have an opponent who is a a strong grappler we try to keep him standing up and vice versa. There are lots of ways to avoid being taken down, it's not inevitable. One of the reason we have a wide stance in MMA...quite hard for me to change from a karate stance.... is to help avoid the takedowns. As Kamon says, get some BJJ into your training if you can, don't be discouraged whatever your style and theres some really good advice from the guys on here!




ehh...If you pick up BJJ, you are now a MMA fighter and less of a WC pratictioner.  WC has great ground fighting capabilities because we are used to very close range attacks.  Everything that you learn standing up, can be applied when horizontal.  You do want to avoid going to the ground and WC has great anti-grappling moves that most people aren't interested in learning.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 12, 2007)

brocklee said:


> ehh...If you pick up BJJ, you are now a MMA fighter and less of a WC pratictioner. WC has great ground fighting capabilities because we are used to very close range attacks. Everything that you learn standing up, can be applied when horizontal. You do want to avoid going to the ground and WC has great anti-grappling moves that most people aren't interested in learning.


 

I don't think that because you do one style and also do BJJ that makes you an MMA fighter, it's not that easy lol!


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> I don't think that because you do one style and also do BJJ that makes you an MMA fighter, it's not that easy lol!




It's a lot easier then trying to keep them separate.  I do think that if I were to select another fighting style it would be BJJ.  It's a great style.  However, there's much more to be learned in my WC and don't see time in the future to incorporate it into my training.  

I believe if you're training 2 styles, you will start switching between the two when called into a fight.  When this happens, I would say that its MMA.  If you can stick to the BJJ in one fight and then use only WC in another, then you are really good at mental and physical control.  It would be difficult to rely on muscle memory, that's for sure.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 12, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Well, it's very hard to spar and not lose if using WC.


 
It's really difficult to "play spar" with friends, using any traditional martial art.  You are just playing, not reallying fighting, so whatever you throw at them, you can't really hurt them.  If you tag your grappling buddy with a punch and say "I just nailed you",  he says "no you didn't, it didn't hurt me!" and then he just grapples you down.  A lot of traditional martial arts, esp. those geared toward striking, just don't work if you do them "half way".  It's really a matter of all or nothing.  You need to use it 100%, or not at all 'cause it won't work if you don't.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> It's really difficult to "play spar" with friends, using any traditional martial art.  You are just playing, not reallying fighting, so whatever you throw at them, you can't really hurt them.  If you tag your grappling buddy with a punch and say "I just nailed you",  he says "no you didn't, it didn't hurt me!" and then he just grapples you down.  A lot of traditional martial arts, esp. those geared toward striking, just don't work if you do them "half way".  It's really a matter of all or nothing.  You need to use it 100%, or not at all 'cause it won't work if you don't.



Yes   It really becomes a switch too, between off and on.  And that's where staying relaxed plays a big part.  I've gotten to the point where when my friends accidentally hit me...I pop into relaxed mode so that I don't kill them. lol 

I've used WC a decent amount of times in bar fights and street brawls.  Once that switch is turned on, it takes outsiders to tear me off the other guy.  It's great because mentally I just sit back and watch the fight.  The body does the rest of the work.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 13, 2007)

brocklee said:


> WC has great ground fighting capabilities because we are used to very close range attacks..


No no no no no !!! 
If you are taken to the floor, you're wing chun goes to pot. Think about where you generate power from. Your stance and your hip. If you are pinned, you can't use these. It is unlikely that you will run into a BJJ black belt in the street, but most big guys can hold you down. 

A lot of good wing chun masters realise that wing chun is not good on the ground. Both Kevin Chan and Alan Orr have explored grappling arts for this very reason. 



brocklee said:


> Everything that you learn standing up, can be applied when horizontal. You do want to avoid going to the ground and WC has great anti-grappling moves that most people aren't interested in learning.


Again, you can do some 'okay' anti grappling techniques, but these will not work on experienced street fighters or anyone who has done a good bit of grappling training
Yet if you learnt BJJ and add your wing chun to that, its devastating


----------



## brocklee (Sep 13, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> No no no no no !!!
> If you are taken to the floor, you're wing chun goes to pot. Think about where you generate power from. Your stance and your hip. If you are pinned, you can't use these. It is unlikely that you will run into a BJJ black belt in the street, but most big guys can hold you down.
> 
> A lot of good wing chun masters realise that wing chun is not good on the ground. Both Kevin Chan and Alan Orr have explored grappling arts for this very reason.
> ...



Ok, so you're a MMA fighter then.  The pieces are falling together.  

And on the street, belts hold up pants and keep engines going.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 14, 2007)

No not really. I don't go to MMA gyms or mix up movements. My primary art is wing chun. But if I go to ground, I'm not going to frantically attempt to hit the attacker, because it is a bad position, with no possibility of hip rotation. I can hit pretty hard using just brute force, but so could my attacker!

I would rather neutralise him with BJJ, recover and then get back into wing chun mode

I would challenge any wing chunner to start off on the floor with an average grappler or street fighter and still win the fight.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 14, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> But if I go to ground, I'm not going to frantically attempt to hit the attacker, because it is a bad position, with no possibility of hip rotation. I can hit pretty hard using just brute force, but so could my attacker!


 
wing chun includes much more than just chain punching.  There are a lot of trapping moves that can work well on the floor, until you manage to get back to your feet.



> I would rather neutralise him with BJJ, recover and then get back into wing chun mode


 
If you have neutralized him with BJJ, then I suppose you have choked him out or dislocated his ankle or shoulder or something and the fight is over.  You don't need to get back up and go into wing chun mode.



> I would challenge any wing chunner to start off on the floor with an average grappler or street fighter and still win the fight.


 
Why would you ever BEGIN a fight on the ground?  This just makes no sense.  Something had to happen to get you there first.

Self defense is not about staying on the ground and attempting to win the submission.  That is the realm of competition.  In self defense, if you go to the ground then you need to work for the first chance to get back up and get away.  You NEVER want to stick around and win the submission.  That doesn't matter.  All that matters is getting away with minimal injury.

If you try to defeat a specialist in his area of specialty, you will lose.  Never let him force you into his game.  Make him play your game.

Do you think that the average street punk, against whom you might need to defend yourself (not compete against, it's a different thing), is going to have training in BJJ?  I seriously doubt it...


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 14, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> If you try to defeat a specialist in his area of specialty, you will lose. Never let him force you into his game. Make him play your game.


 
This is very important, important enough for me to repeat.

I don't know how this thread started to show signs of mutating yet again into a "Martial Arts don't work" fest but I do wish people would think once in a while about how and why the arts were developed.  

Contrast that with the lineage of 'street brawling' or MMA aggressive sports.

Which were designed from the outset to kill when your weapons were unavailable?  At base level, martial arts are not about 'playing' at fighting or winning on points.

As to training in more than one art, that's a touch less clear cut.  My usual answer is don't train in more than one until you're actually any good in the first.  The division of effort tends to mean that you're less good at both.  If you have the time to devote solely to martial training and have the knack for it tho', then by all means do more than one.

On the anecdotal front, in empty hand 'work', I've never felt disadvantaged knowing _only_ kung fu.  It has no emphasis on ground work per se, other than the short, horrid, strikes needed to get away from would-be grapplers.  However, I was fairly sure that unless I didn't see it coming, I wouldn't end up on the ground anyway.  Manoever and evasion *are* things kung fu emphasises quite well.  If you get 'rushed and crushed' then the not-very-advertised techniques need to be used - the ones that get you locked up for more than just Breach of the Peace or Common Assault.

I realise I'm getting a bit too deeply serious here, so I'll shut up - I blame the excellent Verdelho I'm cossetting right now .


----------



## SilatFan (Sep 14, 2007)

Threads like this (and the attitudes and misconceptions they reveal) are one of the reasons I didnt stay in WC for long.   There is so much talking done in the average WC class about how technical, scientific and principal based WC is as well as how it proven to be made for the smaller person, and blah, blah, blah  In the beginning it creates a false sense of security in the student and after a few years it creates a real arrogance and then the student is so invested in believing the propaganda that they refuse to acknowledge the truth and eventually begin to regurgitate it to the next generation.  Any statement that implies that their art isnt perfect and doesnt have ALL the answers is taken as a personal indictment on all that is holy.  Instead of continuing to grow, instead of continuing to learn they become further and further separated from the rest of the world and reality.  Instead of helping others avoid this trap they try to get others to fall into it because to do otherwise would mean that they were wrong (in other words its about their ego and their fear).  
This same statement could be attributed to just about every MA out there but as someone that has study many arts for many years WC, in my experience, tends to be guilty of this to a higher degree than any other that Ive ever encountered.  

Nyrotic:
Follow Kamon Guys advice.  There definitely are some other good responses on this thread but his are the ones that stood out to me the most at this time.  Definitely continue to study WC and do your best to learn it but if anyone tries to tell you that it has the answers to defending yourself on the ground then they are either grossly misinformed or lying to you (and themselves) outright and please refer to the first paragraph.  Grappling is a REAL issue for self-defense.  Just because you wouldnt recommend trying to use it on someone because its a better idea to stay on your feet does not mean that it wont be devastating to you when its used on you.  Reference your own training experience with two untrained grapplers.  It is one thing untrained street fighters do naturally.  If self-defense is why you are training then get some ground training as well as  not necessarily instead of  your WC.     

Good luck and have fun!


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

SilatFan said:


> Threads like this (and the attitudes and misconceptions they reveal) are one of the reasons I didnt stay in WC for long.   There is so much talking done in the average WC class about how technical, scientific and principal based WC is as well as how it proven to be made for the smaller person, and blah, blah, blah  In the beginning it creates a false sense of security in the student and after a few years it creates a real arrogance and then the student is so invested in believing the propaganda that they refuse to acknowledge the truth and eventually begin to regurgitate it to the next generation.  Any statement that implies that their art isnt perfect and doesnt have ALL the answers is taken as a personal indictment on all that is holy.  Instead of continuing to grow, instead of continuing to learn they become further and further separated from the rest of the world and reality.  Instead of helping others avoid this trap they try to get others to fall into it because to do otherwise would mean that they were wrong (in other words its about their ego and their fear).
> This same statement could be attributed to just about every MA out there but as someone that has study many arts for many years WC, in my experience, tends to be guilty of this to a higher degree than any other that Ive ever encountered.
> 
> Nyrotic:
> ...



Sounds like you had one of THOSE sifus.  Sorry to hear it.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Well, it's very hard to spar and not lose if using WC.  The reason being is that WC is a lawless style and can only be effective if used at full force.



I've heard this from practitioners of a number of styles, but the majority are WC people. It is not persuasive. If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I've heard this from practitioners of a number of styles, but the majority are WC people. It is not persuasive. If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?



HAHA  Welcome back.  We missed you


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Ok, so you're a MMA fighter then.  The pieces are falling together.



I don't see what's wrong with MMA. What difference does it make if you win with a roundhouse to the face, a choke, or a chain punch?


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> HAHA  Welcome back.  We missed you



Thanks. I look forward to your responsive reply.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

Not to be horribly negative, *Tanizaki* but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.

Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.

I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why?  I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge.  Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Not to be horribly negative, *Tanizaki* but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.
> 
> Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.
> 
> I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why?  I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge.  Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?



The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad.  WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC.  This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.

WC is very effective and only at full blast.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

Cheers *Brocklee* :tup:.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Not to be horribly negative, *Tanizaki* but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.


Gee, then I wonder why there is competition for western boxing, judo, muay thai, kendo, karate, or any other number of martial arts?



> Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.


This is still unpersuasive. Punches and kicks are major techniques. 



> I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why?  I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge.  Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?



I practice WC, so I obviously am not anti-WC. However, I think "I would beat you if there were no rules" is a weak retort. The rules constrain both members of the fight equally, so what makes you think that your "no rules" fighting is going to be better than the "no rules" fighting of the guy who just wiped the floor with you?


----------



## theletch1 (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad. WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC. This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.
> 
> WC is very effective and only at full blast.


This is also one of the complaints that I hear about aikido.  The concepts used in aikido are very counter-instinctive and take a long time to become proficient with.  Much of the training in the dojo at the lower ranks is done with a somewhat or completely compliant uke giving the new student a sense of competence that is not really there.  Take that to the street too soon and you're in big trouble.  WC and aikido both are very much up close and personal arts instead of keeping a certain distance for a punch or kick.  When done correctly and proficiently both of these arts tend to make things look way too easy to those who do not practice the art.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad.  WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC.  This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.


I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced. Still, he should be able to do better against untrained fighters, no matter what style he practices.



> WC is very effective and only at full blast.



This is a tautology. Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced. Still, he should be able to do better against untrained fighters, no matter what style he practices.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a tautology. Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.



YAAAY!


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> YAAAY!



The reason I say this is because you may have read what I was saying, but you weren't hearing what was said.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

I think perhaps that we're talking apples and oranges, *Tani*.  I'm not sure we'll ever agree because we see the world through entirely different eyes and yet we think we're trying to talk about the same thing.

I'm not being flatly contradictory but I feel your final point is disingenuous and I hope that you are really aware of the realities of pitting someone trained to fight within boundaries against someone who is not.

That said, it is of course the case that kicks and punches are a couple of the major categories of types of attack and that there are a considerable number of variants on both.  Whatever the variant, the only thing that matters is that you put the energy where you want it.  Sometimes that target is simple blunt trauma; other times it's somewhat more lethal.  Of course, a lethal punch can be thrown by the most untrained of individuals, which is why getting into a fight in the first place when you can avoid it is insane.

As to why competition's exist these days for martial arts, well that's a whole other subject that is worthy of a thread of it's own. Personally, I'm not in favour of them as being indicative of anything other than being able to win competitions.

Anyhow, injuries mean that empty hand conflict is a thing of the past for me (sad that one bike accident can wipe away more than a decade of training) so the whole topic is moot in my personal case and I shall bow out and go play with my swords.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced.


 
possibly true, and yes, inexperience is a big handicap.



> Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.


 
it's not the same thing.  Boxers are both fighting under the SAME RULES.  They agree to abide by the rules, they wear gloves that affect how they can attack each other, and they have at it.

However, this is very different from the original post.  Nyrotic is primarily a striker.  He was horsing around with friends.  Some of the friends are grapplers, or at least are instinctive grapplers without formal training.  They are both approaching the game, the horse play, with different assumptions.  Nyrotic throws a punch that lands, but because these are friends, he pulls his power and doesn't injure them.  He is operating under the assumption that his friends will acknowledge and respect that punch, and recognize the fact that they would have been injured if he had not pulled his power back.  But because the punch did no actual damage, the friends ignore it, charge in and grapple him down.  Grappling techs cannot be ignored, and they are much much easier to execute at less than full power.  Grappling has an advantage under horseplay, where nobody wants to really hurt anybody.  Grappling techs can be executed to just the level needed to control the opponent without injury.  Striking techs don't have this capability.  They either injure, or they do not.  If they do not, and the other guy chooses to not respect the fact that he just got hit, then it doesn't work.

A comparable situation would be if one boxer always pulled his punches to avoid injury, but the other boxer was landing strikes with full power.  Even if the first boxer landed 10 times the strikes, he loses because he pulled back.  The other guy who chose to ignore the strikes and then hit back with full power will win.  If they are operating under different and unequal rules, it doesn't work.

Under these circumstances, the only choice Nyrotic has if he chooses to engage in such horseplay with friends, is to bloody a few noses and blacken a few eyes until the other guys start to understand what he could do.  Maybe then they will respect his side of the game.

This reminds me of an incident that happened when I was a teenager.  I had attended a late night youth dance, a friend of mine was horsing around with another guy several years older than us, and who I did not know.  I ended up being pulled into the horseplay, the other guy was drunk, and he thought I was starting to push him around.  I believe the guy has some Tae Kwon Do training, and at the time I was a green belt in kenpo.  

At any rate, it escalated quickly, and he became agressive and beligerent, and started to attack me.  I nullified each his attacks, and set him up to really hurt him.  But I didn't follow thru on any of them because I wasn't quite certain if he was serious, or if this was still just part of the horseplay.  At any rate, I touched his nose with the palm of my hand.  Anther time I actually stuck my fingers in and touched the surface of his eyes.  Another time I set a tiger claw at his groin and prepared to grab, rip, and tear.  Finally I set a tiger claw on his throat and gave a small sqeeze before letting go.  Finally the situation de-escalated, we shook hands and went our separate ways.  He had no idea what I was setting up on him.  Because I chose to not follow thru, he was able to ignore it and keep trying to come in at me.

It was a stupid situation, it could have gotten ugly, and I am glad it ended peacefully.  But it serves as a good example of a failure to acknowledge what is happening.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

Now *that's* a much better rebuttal than mine *FC* - excellent expression of some of what I was trying to say :rei:.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> it's not the same thing.  Boxers are both fighting under the SAME RULES.  They agree to abide by the rules, they wear gloves that affect how they can attack each other, and they have at it.


Then maybe you can answer my question that remains unanswered: If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?



> However, this is very different from the original post.  Nyrotic is primarily a striker.  He was horsing around with friends.  Some of the friends are grapplers, or at least are instinctive grapplers without formal training.  They are both approaching the game, the horse play, with different assumptions.  Nyrotic throws a punch that lands, but because these are friends, he pulls his power and doesn't injure them.  He is operating under the assumption that his friends will acknowledge and respect that punch, and recognize the fact that they would have been injured if he had not pulled his power back.  But because the punch did no actual damage, the friends ignore it, charge in and grapple him down.  Grappling techs cannot be ignored, and they are much much easier to execute at less than full power.  Grappling has an advantage under horseplay, where nobody wants to really hurt anybody.  Grappling techs can be executed to just the level needed to control the opponent without injury.  Striking techs don't have this capability.  They either injure, or they do not.  If they do not, and the other guy chooses to not respect the fact that he just got hit, then it doesn't work.


You weren't there, so you have no idea how the bouts went. That is speculation. Let's say he was going full force where there are "no rules", as is often claimed. Does everyone else have a glass jaw so that Nyrotic's one punch is going to KO every opponent so they'll never get a chance to grapple him?

I'm sorry, but "I would win if not for the rules" is still weak sauce. I don't think Nyrotic said that, but brocklee. I always get a kick when I say something to him that everyone has to be his internet lawyer. I must be a top notch opponent.:2xbird:


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> As to why competition's exist these days for martial arts, well that's a whole other subject that is worthy of a thread of it's own. Personally, I'm not in favour of them as being indicative of anything other than being able to win competitions.



Would you feel comfortable meeting the world boxing champion of your weight class in a dark alley? I wouldn't.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Now *that's* a much better rebuttal than mine *FC* - excellent expression of some of what I was trying to say :rei:.



Yes, I agree.  Nicely put.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Yes, I agree.  Nicely put.



I am in search of an internet lawyer. Pro bono, of course.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

Depends ... is he drunk ?  Am I the bestest Lau Gar practitioner ever?

Are you a political science student, *Tani*?  I just ask because I get the distinct impression of 'answering a question with a question' from your good self and an unwillingness to seek any common ground for real debate.

Anyway, I'm tired and I'm away up the wooden hills.  My parting words remain that I don't concur with your analysis but, in the end, that doesn't mean you don't have every right to be secure within your convictions.  :rei:.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> Then maybe you can answer my question that remains unanswered: If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?


 
Nothing in life is guaranteed.  But if he is allowed to hit with full force, and no target and no technique is off limits, he has a much better chance to use his art as it was designed, and may perhaps win.  At this point, it depends on the skill of the individual.



> You weren't there, so you have no idea how the bouts went. That is speculation.


 
true, that is simply how his description seemed to me.  Perhaps he can come back and give some more clarity.  I could be wrong.  And you could be wrong.



> Let's say he was going full force where there are "no rules", as is often claimed. Does everyone else have a glass jaw so that Nyrotic's one punch is going to KO every opponent so they'll never get a chance to grapple him?


 
depends on how things happen.  Maybe one punch, maybe 10 will do the job.  Maybe he still loses.  But his chances will improve if he is allowed to go full contact with every target and every technique allowed.



> I'm sorry, but "I would win if not for the rules" is still weak sauce.


 
I don't think it's "I would win if not for the rules", but rather, "the art I practice doesn't work well under restrictive rules, and I am not good at playing the sparring game.  Beyond that, it all depends".



> :2xbird:


 
We were having a discussion, it was civil.  Grow up.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Are you a political science student, *Tani*?  I just ask because I get the distinct impression of 'answering a question with a question' from your good self and an unwillingness to seek any common ground for real debate.


I was graduated from university in 1996. Could you please cite where I answered a question with a question?

The "common ground" comment is a straw man. Furthermore, I wonder why you place that onus solely on my shoulders.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> Nothing in life is guaranteed.  But if he is allowed to hit with full force, and no target and no technique is off limits, he has a much better chance to use his art as it was designed, and may perhaps win.  At this point, it depends on the skill of the individual.


This is not responsive. 



> true, that is simply how his description seemed to me.  Perhaps he can come back and give some more clarity.  I could be wrong.  And you could be wrong.


I don't think I was wrong when I said you were speculating.



> depends on how things happen.  Maybe one punch, maybe 10 will do the job.  Maybe he still loses.  But his chances will improve if he is allowed to go full contact with every target and every technique allowed.


He's probably not going to get in 10 punches before being taken to the ground.



> I don't think it's "I would win if not for the rules", but rather, "the art I practice doesn't work well under restrictive rules, and I am not good at playing the sparring game.  Beyond that, it all depends".


"I would win if not for the rules" is exactly what it is. You just repeated it ("the art I practice doesn't work well under restrictive rules"), except with a bit of spin doctoring about the sparring "game".



> We were having a discussion, it was civil.  Grow up.


My internet debating is best when I am not constrained by rules.


----------



## theletch1 (Sep 15, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Jeff Letchford
-MT Moderator-*


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 15, 2007)

have fun entertaining yourself.


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 15, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Chain punches are for the inaccurate and those that don't have enough confidence in their blocking abilities. You can deliver the same amount of dmg with a single 1 inch punch to the chest, neck or face.


 

Why is it presented so strongly then.  Everytime I look on youtube or go to a WC website, you see one or 2 strikes and then a million chain punches OR you see people doing chi sao (sp?) and they are showing how fast they can strike.  What happened to all the other techniques of WC?  I don't ever see any sort of footwork aor blocking techniques exclusively.  Does WC have leg trapping techniques as well?If anyone has any clips I would love to see them and I am not meaning this in a sarcastic way 

Also I see when people "spar" they seem to tilt their head back in order to to get hit in the face....is doing this correct?  Should your head be tilted back to help avoid being striked in the face or should your head be str8?


Here is a video I found that was great while searching youtube.  Features a Master Wong Nim Yi.  I have no idea of who he is..maybe someone else does.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 16, 2007)

AceHBK said:


> Why is it presented so strongly then.  Everytime I look on youtube or go to a WC website, you see one or 2 strikes and then a million chain punches OR you see people doing chi sao (sp?) and they are showing how fast they can strike.


Great set of questions  A good deal of the videos that are demonstrating chain punches come from either WT or a type of WC that has incorporated it into their system.  I was taught by my first instructor, "When in doubt, chain punch out."  At the time this seemed like a great idea and was very effect against the untrained.  If you take a close look at the stance, an individual that chain punches ends up redirecting the energy backwards causing them to move from a 50/50 stance to more of a 30/70 stance.  If they can fight to stay up right, it will cause the elbows to kick out just to keep the chain going. From the get go energy is being lost.  It conflicts with the efficiency concept.  Also, in order to do a series of chain punches, you are required to stop the arm's motion prior to its full extension.  It requires the use of the tricep to stop the arm which causes the practitioner to flex at least twice a second or even more depending on how fast the guy thinks he is   Another efficiency issue.

Chain punches look pretty cool when done with temporary accuracy and bursts of speed.  This usually gives a nice blur and adds a little hollywood effect to the video.  Because the videos aren't SO boring, people place them online.  A good solid WC punch has no dress up to it and doesn't draw attention...Other then when you put out candles with it or flick your cigarette ash using the one incher 



AceHBK said:


> What happened to all the other techniques of WC?  I don't ever see any sort of footwork aor blocking techniques exclusively.  Does WC have leg trapping techniques as well?If anyone has any clips I would love to see them and I am not meaning this in a sarcastic way


All the other techniques are still there but not used as much because WC wasn't properly drilled into the student's head.  I stated prior that some students misinterpret the lesson behind timing and sensitivity drills and believe that the purpose is to build a certain type of "combo flow", which it's not.  It's not good when this happens because it sends the student down a misleading path and will hinder the speed at which they learn WC.   

I don't believe that we have moves specific to the leg trap but with WC you can take a simple move and make it do anything for you.  Just depends on how you work it.  I wouldn't suggest trapping the legs because it's so much easier to just pop the guy in the face, chest or neck.




AceHBK said:


> Also I see when people "spar" they seem to tilt their head back in order to to get hit in the face....is doing this correct?  Should your head be tilted back to help avoid being striked in the face or should your head be str8?


WCer's don't really spar, we play around with other students, train or use it.  The answer to your question is no.  The head tilts back because of fear and causes the individual to lose their center and structure.  They're already in the position to fall back.  If I we're the opponent, I would simply step in and push their chest.  My structure would cause them to topple over.  The head must remain in the position which best suits your structure and the chin tucked in.  Don't worry about being struck in the face.  You'll forget it even happened if you win the fight.  If you get put in the situation to where you think your face is going to get struck, mmmm block it? hehe


Cheers


----------



## theletch1 (Sep 16, 2007)

brocklee said:


> WCer's don't really spar, we play around with other students, train or use it. The answer to your question is no. The head tilts back because of fear and causes the individual to lose their center and structure. They're already in the position to fall back. If I we're the opponent, I would simply step in and push their chest. My structure would cause them to topple over. The head must remain in the position which best suits your structure and the chin tucked in. Don't worry about being struck in the face. You'll forget it even happened if you win the fight. If you get put in the situation to where you think your face is going to get struck, mmmm block it? hehe
> 
> 
> Cheers


  My aikido instructor has used the analogy that your head is simply an egg sitting in a hollowed out space on top of your shoulders.  Lean the head back too far and it will fall out.  Lean your body forward too far and it will fall out.  Proper body structure is imperative if you are using your center to generate power.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 16, 2007)

theletch1 said:


> My aikido instructor has used the analogy that your head is simply an egg sitting in a hollowed out space on top of your shoulders.  Lean the head back too far and it will fall out.  Lean your body forward too far and it will fall out.  Proper body structure is imperative if you are using your center to generate power.



I've never heard that before but it does apply well.  Thx


----------



## barnaby (Sep 17, 2007)

WCer's don't really spar, we play around with other students, train or use it. The answer to your question is no. The head tilts back because of fear and causes the individual to lose their center and structure. They're already in the position to fall back. 


Cheers[/quote]


this is a Wing Chun forum -- thank you for bringing up structure.


----------



## Selfcritical (Sep 17, 2007)

brocklee said:


> It's a lot easier then trying to keep them separate. I do think that if I were to select another fighting style it would be BJJ. It's a great style. However, there's much more to be learned in my WC and don't see time in the future to incorporate it into my training.
> 
> I believe if you're training 2 styles, you will start switching between the two when called into a fight. When this happens, I would say that its MMA. If you can stick to the BJJ in one fight and then use only WC in another, then you are really good at mental and physical control. It would be difficult to rely on muscle memory, that's for sure.


 
With these two arts, it's pretty freakin simple; if you're not on your back or sitting on top of the person, don't use BJJ. Use what standup skill you have to knock them silly or take them down. Once their on the ground or they've taken you to the ground, finish there.


----------



## Selfcritical (Sep 17, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> It's really difficult to "play spar" with friends, using any traditional martial art. You are just playing, not reallying fighting, so whatever you throw at them, you can't really hurt them. If you tag your grappling buddy with a punch and say "I just nailed you", he says "no you didn't, it didn't hurt me!" and then he just grapples you down. A lot of traditional martial arts, esp. those geared toward striking, just don't work if you do them "half way". It's really a matter of all or nothing. You need to use it 100%, or not at all 'cause it won't work if you don't.


 
No matter what strikes you're using, the ability to hit the guy when he's trying to hit you is a useful ability. The ability to not get hit when he's actively trying to hit you is just as essential. Sparring under lighter contact might not work every tool you have, and thus you have whatever additional drilling your system calls for, but sparring will ALWAYS strengthen the core attributes of timing, accuracy, and defense that will come up in the application of ALL techniques. You want to be more confident about how your techinques will work when someone is trying to stop you? Spar under a variety of rulesets as often as they can. Yes, some of your techniques won't be as effective as they are in real life......as long as you're getting better at actually landing, who cares if your sparring partner knows you could have hurt him worse?


----------



## Selfcritical (Sep 17, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced. Still, he should be able to do better against untrained fighters, no matter what style he practices.


 
Unless they are more explosive athletes who are more aggressive than he is. Someone with 6 months in a martial art will generally get creamed by a football player with 30 pounds and years of being used to getting hit as hard as people can. This isn't discounting the importance of training, just noting that sometimes you'll get beat by genetics and conditioning.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 17, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> have fun entertaining yourself.


 

I wouldn't even waste the the typing energy with him :snipe2:


----------



## brocklee (Sep 17, 2007)

Selfcritical said:


> Unless they are more explosive athletes who are more aggressive than he is. Someone with 6 months in a martial art will generally get creamed by a football player with 30 pounds and years of being used to getting hit as hard as people can. This isn't discounting the importance of training, just noting that sometimes you'll get beat by genetics and conditioning.



Very smart


----------



## brocklee (Sep 17, 2007)

Selfcritical said:


> sparring will ALWAYS strengthen the core attributes of timing, accuracy, and defense



Not sure of how good your knowledge is about WC, but we use chi sao to work these attributes.  

Sparring for WC is pretty much just playing around for us.  Take a look at this:  http://www.metacafe.com/watch/617621/wing_chun_sparring/

It appears silly and soft and kind of flamboyant, if you ask me.  Almost pointless, other then the interaction with the training partner.  The subject to the video states that they are sparring, to me it kinda looks like a free roaming chi sao session.  Either way, they're just moving around and slapping each other.  There is no energy battle of structure or definite move, as if it were a real fight.  A WCer strives to end the fight with as few moves as possible.  This sparring session here is just a waste of energy and is really one guy, the bigger one, showing how he can use intimidation to over power another student during training   Non of the moves being thrown actually have a purpose other then point A to point B and "hey dude, I just got in on you"

The only way to truly work on WC fighting is to actually go out and use it.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 17, 2007)

Flying Crane said:


> wing chun includes much more than just chain punching. There are a lot of trapping moves that can work well on the floor, until you manage to get back to your feet....


Defiantely and I use these in BJJ, but you need baasic knowledge of grappling (ie mounting, side control etc) before you can apply trapping moves, otherwise you will be bucked off



Flying Crane said:


> If you have neutralized him with BJJ, then I suppose you have choked him out or dislocated his ankle or shoulder or something and the fight is over. You don't need to get back up and go into wing chun mode....


Woah woah, don't assume that neutralised means arm bars are finishing moves etc
When I say neutralised, I mean controlling your opponent etc. I would never use an arm bar on the ground in a street fight 



Flying Crane said:


> Why would you ever BEGIN a fight on the ground? This just makes no sense. Something had to happen to get you there first....


Exactly. I have been attacked from behind, dragged to the floor, punched to the ground. All I'm saying is that a wing chunner should never assume that he will not go to ground. I found a clip on Youtube of Royce Gracie vs a kung fu artist the other day. It is a basic example of how BJJ guys can take down a kung fu guy. This is just one art.



Flying Crane said:


> Self defense is not about staying on the ground and attempting to win the submission. That is the realm of competition. In self defense, if you go to the ground then you need to work for the first chance to get back up and get away. You NEVER want to stick around and win the submission. That doesn't matter. All that matters is getting away with minimal injury....


Definately, I agree 100% with you. That is why I said that if I went to the floor I would get control and then get onto my feet. Ground is dangerous and if you have multiple attackers you are stuck


Flying Crane said:


> If you try to defeat a specialist in his area of specialty, you will lose. Never let him force you into his game. Make him play your game....


Sometimes you don't have a choice!! Like we mentioned previously, you could end up on the floor for whatever reason


Flying Crane said:


> Do you think that the average street punk, against whom you might need to defend yourself (not compete against, it's a different thing), is going to have training in BJJ? I seriously doubt it...


You would be surprised how many good basic grapplers there are out there. As I mentioned, I am not talking about high level BJJ'ers (if you met one of them, you would be in problems). But strong guys who can grip onto you like a vice or low level grappling practitioners.
But again, there is a lot of assumption from wing chunners that it will never happen


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 17, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Not sure of how good your knowledge is about WC, but we use chi sao to work these attributes.
> 
> Sparring for WC is pretty much just playing around for us. Take a look at this: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/617621/wing_chun_sparring/
> 
> ...


Brock, you are bang on the money once again. I personally detest the word sparring in wing chun. Sparring is for people who do sports based martial arts. In Kamon we call them 'feeding techniques' where one person attacks with anything you like and you got to defend it!

Chi sao is probably the closest thing to a spar in wing chun as it builds up all those attributes previously mentioned

Padding up and going at it is just a waste of time. You want real impacts, skin on skin


----------



## Selfcritical (Sep 17, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> You would be surprised how many good basic grapplers there are out there. As I mentioned, I am not talking about high level BJJ'ers (if you met one of them, you would be in problems). But strong guys who can grip onto you like a vice or low level grappling practitioners.
> But again, there is a lot of assumption from wing chunners that it will never happen



Given the popularity of both folkstyle wrestling and american rules football, the percentage of people starting bar fights with some skill in taking people to the ground is not neglible.


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 17, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Great set of questions  A good deal of the videos that are demonstrating chain punches come from either WT or a type of WC that has incorporated it into their system. I was taught by my first instructor, "When in doubt, chain punch out." At the time this seemed like a great idea and was very effect against the untrained. If you take a close look at the stance, an individual that chain punches ends up redirecting the energy backwards causing them to move from a 50/50 stance to more of a 30/70 stance. If they can fight to stay up right, it will cause the elbows to kick out just to keep the chain going. From the get go energy is being lost. It conflicts with the efficiency concept. Also, in order to do a series of chain punches, you are required to stop the arm's motion prior to its full extension. It requires the use of the tricep to stop the arm which causes the practitioner to flex at least twice a second or even more depending on how fast the guy thinks he is  Another efficiency issue.
> 
> Chain punches look pretty cool when done with temporary accuracy and bursts of speed. This usually gives a nice blur and adds a little hollywood effect to the video. Because the videos aren't SO boring, people place them online. A good solid WC punch has no dress up to it and doesn't draw attention...Other then when you put out candles with it or flick your cigarette ash using the one incher
> 
> ...


 
Thanks!!!  You have educated me.


----------



## Tordk (Sep 17, 2007)

hehe.. just remembered something I once read.. "There are no championships in Wing Chun, because there would be a winner on the podium, and everybody else would be in the hospital..

but i agree to that sparring with some friends of yours, never will be the same as an actual fight.. Let´s be honest.. a lot of the movements in wing chun wil by many be considered as unfair moves.. :S


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 18, 2007)

Tordk said:


> hehe.. just remembered something I once read.. "There are no championships in Wing Chun, because there would be a winner on the podium, and everybody else would be in the hospital..
> 
> but i agree to that sparring with some friends of yours, never will be the same as an actual fight.. Let´s be honest.. a lot of the movements in wing chun wil by many be considered as unfair moves.. :S


 
I know that they do hold chi sao tournaments in Hong kong every now and then and people have tried to arrange a 'no holes barred' tournament

For me, sport is sport. Wing chun is for when you are in that bar fight and don't want to end up submitting someone


----------



## brocklee (Sep 18, 2007)

Tordk said:


> hehe.. just remembered something I once read.. "There are no championships in Wing Chun, because there would be a winner on the podium, and everybody else would be in the hospital..
> 
> but i agree to that sparring with some friends of yours, never will be the same as an actual fight.. Let´s be honest.. a lot of the movements in wing chun wil by many be considered as unfair moves.. :S



That's pretty funny


----------



## Tordk (Sep 18, 2007)

yeah I thought it was a pretty fun fact as well..


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 18, 2007)

First off
1) Time factor;Wing Tsun has to be prepped,cooked,presented,eaten,&  digested.Hence;Siu nim Tau SMALL Ideal
2) 2nd form; Chum Kiu  arm seeking form or bridge arms (still considered  a learning stage at this point) can use skills but not at a high level of proficiency.Time involved at this point at least two years.
do yourself a favor and take a look at the Wing Tsun grading system for a detailed explanation.
I would not attempt to take on someone from another style unless I reached at least a level beyond the student grades.1-5 and there is a reason for this.
3) Real kung Fu/ Martial arts fighting involves time for real,most people want fast food fast and nobody wants to work for it.
Wing Tsun is an awesome and dynamic fighting art and involves a great deal of commitment,patience,and an un-learning of tension and the urge to power through.need more?


----------



## Nyrotic (Sep 18, 2007)

qwksilver61 said:


> First off
> 1) Time factor;Wing Tsun has to be prepped,cooked,presented,eaten,& digested.Hence;Siu nim Tau SMALL Ideal
> 2) 2nd form; Chum Kiu arm seeking form or bridge arms (still considered a learning stage at this point) can use skills but not at a high level of proficiency.Time involved at this point at least two years.
> do yourself a favor and take a look at the Wing Tsun grading system for a detailed explanation.
> ...


 
No thanks, I'm full ^_^

I've been doing some thinking, and thanks to some personal insight, as well as most of you here, I've come to realize that I am simply an inexperienced MA'ist. I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'. It takes all my reserve to not attack him while walking home sometimes. If anything, his little glory run is probably what made me feel bad in the first place.

One last thing....why do my threads always turn into battlefields?

-Nyro


----------



## barnaby (Sep 19, 2007)

"I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'."


he'll have his card pulled soon if that's the kind of character he has.  it's a shame that people weigh self-esteem on this sort of thing.

and on conversations about whether or not it's important to train outside of one's form to prepare for things like going to the ground.  

one's form is a very personal choice, and doesn't have as many limitations as people think.  there's nothing that says one can't be influenced by other players while staying in the context of one's form.  I don't have a problem with MMA fighters -- I admire and even work out with them when it's mutually beneficial.

I am bored to tears with MMA rhetoric finding its way into what's supposed to be an exploration of the Wing Chun form.  

sorry, Nyrotic, if I end up perpetuating the battle you mentioned.


----------



## DaveyBoy (Sep 19, 2007)

Nyrotic said:


> I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'. It takes all my reserve to not attack him while walking home sometimes. If anything, his little glory run is probably what made me feel bad in the first place.


 
Don't worry about it mate. Think of it this way - your friend is bragging about the fact that he's helping you find the flaws in your application of Wing Chun! You can now address them. Once you have, your Wing Chun will be better and you'll reach the point where he'll never beat you again no matter how hard he tries. Just give it time!


----------



## SilatFan (Sep 19, 2007)

Nyrotic said:


> No thanks, I'm full ^_^
> 
> I've been doing some thinking, and thanks to some personal insight, as well as most of you here, I've come to realize that I am simply an inexperienced MA'ist. I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'. It takes all my reserve to not attack him while walking home sometimes. If anything, his little glory run is probably what made me feel bad in the first place.
> 
> ...


Wow... Gone a while and things really take off.  

Do like you have figured out.  Keep training and growing.  Next time your friends 'laughing' begins to get to you ask yourself why it bothers you so much.  Be honest with yourself and dont settle for a superficial answer.  Your 'friend' could end up helping you learn more about yourself than just what/how your are as a WC practitioner.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 19, 2007)

Now *that's* good advice to take home and keep - well said that man :tup:.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 19, 2007)

qwksilver61 said:


> First off
> 1) Time factor;Wing Tsun has to be prepped,cooked,presented,eaten,&  digested.Hence;Siu nim Tau SMALL Ideal
> 2) 2nd form; Chum Kiu  arm seeking form or bridge arms (still considered  a learning stage at this point) can use skills but not at a high level of proficiency.Time involved at this point at least two years.
> do yourself a favor and take a look at the Wing Tsun grading system for a detailed explanation.
> ...



Is this a joke? lol you said power through


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 19, 2007)

Nyrotic said:


> No thanks, I'm full ^_^
> 
> I've been doing some thinking, and thanks to some personal insight, as well as most of you here, I've come to realize that I am simply an inexperienced MA'ist. I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'. It takes all my reserve to not attack him while walking home sometimes. If anything, his little glory run is probably what made me feel bad in the first place.
> 
> ...


 
Let him have his glory, he will get soft while you train your *** off and beat the living daylights out of him  ....

...Wasnt that in a movie once.

Seriously, get out and train with more people in the style that you are finding problems with, even when you are beaten you can learn lessons. Every time I fight or spar, I look at the whole picture, what worked, what didn't, how could I improve, what would I do next time I had to face a similar attack, on and on the questions come, but remember this one saying "questions are king" learn to ask them, look for the answers and you will improve, and remember also that 1% improvment every day has a compounding effect, over time.

Respectfully 

Mark


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 19, 2007)

barnaby said:


> "I think the one thing that REALLY does tick me off, however, is that to THIS DAY, my 'friend' is always flaunting about how he beat me the last two 'fights'."
> 
> 
> he'll have his card pulled soon if that's the kind of character he has. it's a shame that people weigh self-esteem on this sort of thing.
> ...


It is very important to not be led into thinking that wing chun can cover everything. Wing chun can be used for grappling but you need to understand basic concepts like mounting, guards etc, which do not come from wing chun. The wing chun grappling I have seen both through various classes and videos from youtube etc has been very poor.
I would love to know, hand on heart, if any wing chunners on here who have not been trained in any grappling art have ever outdone someone on the floor or outdone a grappler

Wing chun is a great art, but a full contact art. It is difficult to use light wing chun for any kind of simulated fighting. In boxing you can spar light or hard, but in wing chun, if you do a light punch, your partner wouldn't react in the same way they would if you threw in a hard punch. This makes any kind of light simulated fighting unrealistic and difficult against a MMA'er. In a real confrontation, I will smash the person in with hard punches, etc and they will fall over, cover up or counter differently to how you do with a friendly training partner in class


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 19, 2007)

In response to Brocklee; a true Wing Tsun man never *powers* (ie; the bicep & the tricep working against one another)through,in the real school of Wing Tsun you have to understand "preserving the gravity of the trunk" this is achieved through the repetitive wall bag exercises,if your shoulders move back when your punch is delivered,you are pushing (forcing your punch) if you have to reach you are commiting and not preserving the gravity of the trunk.
Over time by *smacking  *the wallbag will you develop smackdown power similar to a whip (that is why it is most important to relax,in time you will develop a springy muscle) add the turnstile effect,straightline attack,and there you go. Call/ask any practitioner of The Wing Tsun system and he will probably give you an explanation,or you can buy the books,but as a good student knows there is nothing like real instruction,the books only aid in explaining theory.Do some homework,Or find a real school.For the other fellow don't give up!persevere! Find a real Wing Tsun school,go online.Someday.......


----------



## barnaby (Sep 20, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> It is very important to not be led into thinking that wing chun can cover everything. Wing chun can be used for grappling but you need to understand basic concepts like mounting, guards etc, which do not come from wing chun. The wing chun grappling I have seen both through various classes and videos from youtube etc has been very poor.
> I would love to know, hand on heart, if any wing chunners on here who have not been trained in any grappling art have ever outdone someone on the floor or outdone a grappler


 
I understand you don't want anyone being overconfident about going to the ground without proper training.  all I'm saying is that there's a structure to Wing Chun which will work on the ground as well, and yes I've found benefit from this structure, on the ground.  just as I'm able to get more done standing, as a result of understanding a kind of efficiency of body structure, that has served me on the ground.

I also was saying that we can be influenced, even train in other styles once that structure is strongly in place and remain within the spirit of Wing Chun.  it becomes a part of you when taught/trained properly, and it isn't a matter of "switching" from one style to the next depending on where you are anymore -- it's all within the structure of the primary art when that structure settles into the practitioners body to a certain degree.  

I don't see it as a matter of techniques -- it's way beyond that to me, though a natural fighter-- athlete can easily latch onto techniques from various styles and do well -- that and a willingness to give or take a beating willl go a long way in martial sports and street fighting, I respect that and I respect its power but it's not the same thing as training in the spirit of an art.  to me.  

thanks, Barnaby


----------



## brocklee (Sep 20, 2007)

qwksilver61 said:


> In response to Brocklee; a true Wing Tsun man never *powers* (ie; the bicep & the tricep working against one another)through,in the real school of Wing Tsun you have to understand "preserving the gravity of the trunk" this is achieved through the repetitive wall bag exercises,if your shoulders move back when your punch is delivered,you are pushing (forcing your punch) if you have to reach you are commiting and not preserving the gravity of the trunk.
> Over time by *smacking  *the wallbag will you develop smackdown power similar to a whip (that is why it is most important to relax,in time you will develop a springy muscle) add the turnstile effect,straightline attack,and there you go. Call/ask any practitioner of The Wing Tsun system and he will probably give you an explanation,or you can buy the books,but as a good student knows there is nothing like real instruction,the books only aid in explaining theory.Do some homework,Or find a real school.For the other fellow don't give up!persevere! Find a real Wing Tsun school,go online.Someday.......




No thanks.  I've been a student of LT before and am happy to have gotten out.  I don't think this is the appropriate thread to discuss which is better or why.  Also, it tends to become an uphill battle discussing this with a WT student, so it isn't even worth talking about.  I've already done my homework and have found a real kuen.  

and wall bags are used to control structure


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 20, 2007)

OK what exactly is it that you study? What have you learned? Besides structure the wall bag is for the development of smack or whip punch power,
get hit by an advanced student and you will see what I am talking about.
Did you ever spar with any of the advance students? Just curious? I'm just trying to remind the people in this part of the form,the Wing Chun forum that we are discussing Wing Chun,That is all.This I not a pissing contest between
me or anyone else.I did read the rules,and I am not here to discredit anyones style or Sifu.I would pay the same respect to your  or anyones Sifu or Instructor and that is the truth. With respect to WING CHUN and other MARTIAL ARTISTS.


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 20, 2007)

I read your profile.Just my opinion,you might have benefited from the Ting system maybe not.You rule, you're the expert,I'm the Idiot,I know nothing at all about martial arts.Meanwhile I will continue to train and train and train.
I'm just curious,how old are you and how long have you been training?What style?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 21, 2007)

qwksilver61 said:


> I read your profile.Just my opinion,you might have benefited from the Ting system maybe not.You rule, you're the expert,I'm the Idiot,I know nothing at all about martial arts.Meanwhile I will continue to train and train and train.
> I'm just curious,how old are you and how long have you been training?What style?



Please stop thread jacking.  Like I said, Im not going to get into an arguement with a LT student.  It's a waste of energy


----------



## brocklee (Sep 21, 2007)

qwksilver61 said:


> Did you ever spar with any of the advance students? .



You mean thpar like thith? http://www.metacafe.com/watch/617621/wing_chun_sparring/

HAHAHA WC and thparing.....yeeesh, they don't go hand in hand

Just PM me if you want to argue....mmmk?


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 21, 2007)

Just a simple question,not an argument.What style? How long have you been practicing.Easy, that is all,no, not thread jacking.I'm just asking you a question.Otherwise, it's real simple,I'm here to discuss theory,not get into matches online or remarks.Who trained you for how long,and what do you know about some of the theory behind Wing Chun?Real easy...we might be able to learn from one another,maybe?Where are you anyway and what schools of Wing Chun are available to you? Do you know the strengths and weaknesses of the different schools?What is your training regimen?simple...............I will read your response, then I will never post in here ever again,all I ask is that you answer what I have asked.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 22, 2007)

Darn it...I responded to this last night and it showed that it posted on my home pc, but here at work it's not showing.  It was pretty lengthy and answered your questions....but maaan, I really don't want to type it again.  Maybe once I get my work done here, Ill get bored and then will try and repost it. 

cheers


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 22, 2007)

No explanation needed,just insight,we're here to help and be helped.No hard feelings whatsoever.no ego,just cool.Have a nice day.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 22, 2007)

Ive been playing WC since 98, off and on with different instructors and different lineages.  There we're only 2 kuens that I would classify as WC because they stuck to the concepts and never included grappling or any other MMA style such as escrima.  I'm currently in the best lineage I could possibly ask for as it is a great line of top students and completely fulfills my expectations of what WC instruction should be.  There's no need to list them because it opens opportunities for an argument or like you said, ego.   I train every day, only about 2 hours at this point in my life and I have classes with my sifu for 2 hours a day, twice a week.  It would be much more but Im currently working on repairing a marriage.  <-----priorities  

One of the reason's that I liked WC over WT is because a bit of history is taught, with my sifu.  Things like the crane and snake, the story behind Ng Mui and the relation to other gung fus during different dynasties.  

a couple of post's up you stated that you wish I answer your questions, and then you'll never post in this thread again....No need, please continue to post.


----------



## qwksilver61 (Sep 23, 2007)

Hey Brocklee,sounds like you have a big job on you're hands already,I have done that one too.Piece of advice;do the right thing, give in and listen.I don't know what you're problems entail but Love and listening go hand in hand.Buy her flowers, woo her,treat her like royalty,I've heard that that is all that women really want, to be made to feel special and that you are giving them attention.I know this too well because I have other Loves too,like;Motorcycling,surfing,Kung Fu,Buddies.So what I ended up doing in re-evaluating and prioritizing.It works trust me.If all that fails,stay focused and move on ( the latter being; what we don't want to happen)
I hope that things work out for you.Yes, I will continue the debate in the primaries,Take care Qwkslver61


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 25, 2007)

Hey man, Brocklee, obviously your wife is important to you, but my advice which I live by is that girlfriends come and go, but the art stays with you

If a woman can't love you for being you and for what you enjoy then maybe you have to re-evaluate her. I know it sounds harsh, but if I marry, she's got to be as appreciative of my training as much as I would be for anything she does. 

I went out with a girl who was a swim champion and she would train every day, but then have a go at me if I went training twice a week!!

Anyway, good luck with whatever you decide


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 25, 2007)

brocklee said:


> One of the reason's that I liked WC over WT is because a bit of history is taught, with my sifu.  Things like the crane and snake, the story behind Ng Mui and the relation to other gung fus during different dynasties.



I didn't know there were grownups who thought Ng Mui was "history".


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 26, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I didn't know there were grownups who thought Ng Mui was "history".


Hey, unless you were there, nothing is certain. A lot of wars and battles are very incorrect - like they say, history is written by the victors. I find the story of Ng Mui no less accurate than most of our 'history'

And hey, even if the story is made up, it is still a good story


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 26, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Hey, unless you were there, nothing is certain.


While there is no such thing as absolute metaphysical certitude, that does not mean that we have to allow every notion, no matter how wacky or unsupported. Most of the people who were directly involved in the Nazi Holocaust, whether perpetrator, victim, or rescuer, is now dead. Soon, none of the people involved will be alive. Would you ever be convinced by someone who says, "Unless you were there, it isn't certain that the Holocaust ever happened. It could be a big hoax"? I hope not. Only a handful of people have ever walked on the moon. Would you say that means I have to entertain the crackpots who say the Apollo moon landings were faked?

I'm sorry, but we don't allow that sort of argument in critical thinking.



> A lot of wars and battles are very incorrect


Can you give an example of an "incorrect" war? Do you think we have no idea when or why the Punic Wars occurred, for example?



> - like they say, history is written by the victors.


People like to say that, but it really isn't true. If so, why do you know so many dreadful things about history's victors?



> I find the story of Ng Mui no less accurate than most of our 'history'


Why? What evidence is there that such a person even existed? The Five Elders are considered by mainstream historians to be fictional. Do you really wish to say that the fact of Ng Mui's existence is just as supported by evidence as Oliver Cromwell's, for example? Please think before you type.



> And hey, even if the story is made up, it is still a good story



That's subjective, but at least you allow that the story may be fictional.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 27, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> While there is no such thing as absolute metaphysical certitude, that does not mean that we have to allow every notion, no matter how wacky or unsupported. Most of the people who were directly involved in the Nazi Holocaust, whether perpetrator, victim, or rescuer, is now dead. Soon, none of the people involved will be alive. Would you ever be convinced by someone who says, "Unless you were there, it isn't certain that the Holocaust ever happened. It could be a big hoax"? I hope not. Only a handful of people have ever walked on the moon. Would you say that means I have to entertain the crackpots who say the Apollo moon landings were faked?.


No, but you shouldn't categorically say that you know 100% that the moon landings are real. 



Tanizaki said:


> I'm sorry, but we don't allow that sort of argument in critical thinking..


How about religion and faith? I'm not religious myself, but most religions are based on nothing more than an idea that God COULD exist
It doesn't mean that I have the right to say that I know 100% that god doesn't exist


Tanizaki said:


> Can you give an example of an "incorrect" war? Do you think we have no idea when or why the Punic Wars occurred, for example?.


I didn't say you had no idea roughly why wars started etc, but unless you were there, starting the war, you will never know the details of that. 



Tanizaki said:


> People like to say that, but it really isn't true. If so, why do you know so many dreadful things about history's victors?.


Please name a strong example where bad things are widely known about a victor 



Tanizaki said:


> Why? What evidence is there that such a person even existed? The Five Elders are considered by mainstream historians to be fictional. Do you really wish to say that the fact of Ng Mui's existence is just as supported by evidence as Oliver Cromwell's, for example? Please think before you type..


Hmmmm, a politicain, probably the most famous in Britain who was seen by thousands of people in his time
Or a monk who was seen by probably a handful of people?
Can you think of any reason why Yip Man would promote the story of Ng Mui when it would probably do more to damage the credibility of the art in the 40s/50s when sexism was still rife?



Tanizaki said:


> That's subjective, but at least you allow that the story may be fictional.


Of course it may be fictional. It is hard to say things are absolute fact. 
We thought that the Sun revolved around the earth at one point as fact


----------



## theletch1 (Sep 27, 2007)

What was the original point of this thread again?:idunno:


----------



## AceHBK (Sep 27, 2007)

theletch1 said:


> What was the original point of this thread again?:idunno:



You beat me too it!!

I was just about to type the samething.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 28, 2007)

theletch1 said:


> What was the original point of this thread again?:idunno:


To make the original poster feel better. So me and Tanizaki are bantering in order to accomplish this goal... Lol


----------



## Nyrotic (Oct 8, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> To make the original poster feel better. So me and Tanizaki are bantering in order to accomplish this goal... Lol


 
Well it's one hell of a good read, I'll give you two that.

(I'm the OP, btw)


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Oct 11, 2007)

Nyrotic said:


> Well it's one hell of a good read, I'll give you two that.
> 
> (I'm the OP, btw)


Exactly! Don't you feel better now?
And hey, if you're ever over in London, give me a bell and we can do some sparring stuff


----------



## Nyrotic (Oct 11, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Exactly! Don't you feel better now?
> And hey, if you're ever over in London, give me a bell and we can do some sparring stuff


 
Fear not brother, for I plan to visit Europe before I die.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Oct 12, 2007)

Nyrotic said:


> Fear not brother, for I plan to visit Europe before I die.


Yes, but try and visit before I die!


----------

