# Trapping discussion



## Flatlander (Mar 15, 2005)

Inspired by another thread, I would like to commence a discussin devoted completely to trapping.  The question raised was "can clinching be considered a form of trapping?"  

I feel that in order to discuss the benfits and drawbacks of trapping, it would be useful to explore what is and what is not considered to be trapping.

In the context of my limited training thus far, I would define trapping, as I know it, to be the immobilization or removal of an obstruction or potential barrier to clear a path for a strike.  _In that context_, I would have to say that, no, clinching is not a form of trapping *if* the requirement of following the trap with a strike is a necessary component of that definition.  However, I have assumed here that the clinch was initiated as a means to control the other body's movement, or otherwise contain it's potential to strike back as a primary objective, as opposed to clearing out a strike line.

Thoughts or comments?  How do you define trapping?  Are there classical and nonclassical trapping methods?  If so, do you find one to be more effective than the other?


----------



## pesilat (Mar 15, 2005)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> Inspired by another thread, I would like to commence a discussin devoted completely to trapping.  The question raised was "can clinching be considered a form of trapping?"
> 
> I feel that in order to discuss the benfits and drawbacks of trapping, it would be useful to explore what is and what is not considered to be trapping.
> 
> ...



For me trapping is obstacle removal. Taking something temporarily out of the game so that I can accomplish a goal. I would put clinching into the trapping category because it can be used to disrupt the opponent's balance - and their balance can be an obstacle for me. My attack that the trap helps me land might be a strike but it might also be a takedown, joint lock, disarm, etc.

I think there is classical and non-classical trapping. Classical trapping is how the trapping is trained - whether it's working pak sao from a static position or working from a more dynamic platform like Chi Sao or Filipino Higot Hubud Lubud.

Non-classical trapping would be taking the principles from the classical trapping and applying them. So it might be that I pin a guy's arms to his sides and headbutt him in the nose. I would say that this is definitely a trap but not a "classical" trap. Another would be while I'm on the ground, I pin the guy's arm to the floor with my knee.

Classical trapping doesn't happen often in a real fight. Non-classical trapping, IMO, happens a lot - it has in every fight I've been in or seen, anyway.

Mike


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 16, 2005)

Hello everybody. Now heres my two cents: trapping is a range, not a set of techniques.Trapping range is when you are close enought to knee ,headbut ,elbow,bite,ect.Most people think trapping means Pak Soa Lop soa, but NO! A range.I dont want to get caught up in semantics but a wrist lock can be considered a trap: a hand imobilization.The clinch can be considered trapping as far as I express JKD/Kali.There is a very fine line between trapping range and grappling.I can clinch with you in Hubud, stick to stick and if you asked me is this trapping or grappling I would say yes.The clinch could be considered a body immobilization.Did you find a submission there or are you headbutting and kneeing in the clinch? As far as my expertise goes there is no definate answer, it becomes very subjective. Barry www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## JKogas (Mar 16, 2005)

Ultimately its going to come down to -- opinions (as always).

Trapping is a range to be sure, but if you're in that range and you're not "trapping", what then??  (Of course, you'd better be doing something because that range isn't too kind to people standing around chit-chatting).

Semantics, all of it really.  I consider the clinch to be face to face whether with an "attachment" or not.  Thats about where the "trapping" range occurs.  We could just end up splitting hairs here.  That's not a _good_ thing.

When you clinch, you immobilize and remove an obstruction.  That's the essense of what trapping is about.  Who cares if you're "here, or there"?  Are we really going to get our micrometers out and start disecting the distances, lol?  In real fight - as fast and frenetic as they are - I doubt anyone's going to care if I'm at arms length or where the hell ever, truthfully.  

Personally, I find the classical trapping range to be a bit dangerous, particularly against a skilled opponent.  That's the distance we call the range of exchanges.  The FUR FLIES in that range and, it's not the greatest distance to be reaching away from the body and exposing yourself, trying to "trap" a limb.  But hey, that's just the side of me speaking that doesn't like to get knocked out.    What do I really know.....


Cheers!

-John


----------



## brothershaw (Mar 16, 2005)

I think of chi sai and hubud/lubud as sensitivity,+ reaction training to get close enough to do close range damage .I think of trapping as a brief momentary thing if that, to get to find an opening and attack the person. Generally speaking I dont think or care too much about trapping/pinning because its not that that important to ME as being able to strike as much and as often as I want. ( if that makes sense to you)
 To me clinching is closer ( I have a some kind of body control and I am elbow and kneeing).

Or more clearly getting to the inside and working my way to "clinch" and finish.

from my viewpoint chisau is more about getting around the oppenent and being able to strike ,trap or no trap.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 16, 2005)

Trapping is a range and an "un-defined" set of techniques. Interception, immobilization and limb destruction are a few of "attached" reactions to trapping. It's a good intermediate setup range to flow from art to art or range to range.

The clinch and trapping are related at least in a sense. I think if one works trapping they should work the clinch too.


----------



## JKogas (Mar 16, 2005)

Just curious as to all of your opinions.  How many "ranges" are there that exist?  Because depending on whom you are speaking with, there can be as few as two and as many as 5 (or more).

-John


----------



## achilles (Mar 17, 2005)

It is all a matter of semantics.  As a range, you could further argue where trapping range ends and grappling begins.  As a set of tools, well, everything from pak sao to the mount are part of JKD's Immobilization Attack.  Really though, when the efficacy of trapping is discussed, accusations are aimed at tools and tactics from wing chun and kali primarily and the rebuttal's are apologetic, trying to comprimise with a more abstract semantic argument.  I've used trapping in sparring.  I have students who have used trapping in sparring.  I've sparred with competitive kickboxers and boxers, so I'm not a fool when it comes to practicing under pressure.  Having said that, I think that trapping is frequently either over-rated or under-rated.  My perception of the matter is that it, like any other tool, has a limited value and a limited window of opportunity.  I use trapping when my hands run into other hands.  When I was training more boxing at PAL gym, people didn't block that much.  A few guys could slip, but most would simply eat a punch and try to hit you with something harder.  Whether trapping is a good idea is ultimately based on what type of structure you are up against.


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 17, 2005)

Hey everybody,I love a good trapping discusion.As to ranges there are basically long range which is kicking range altho I can kick in mid and close.kickboxing range where I can punch and kick but not elbow or knee, trapping range where I can immobilize a limb,kick{low] headbut, knee, elbow,forearm strike,ect, and grappling range[standing or on the ground] BUT all ranges intersect and none is an island unto itself.As to classical vs unclassical trapping, I have no idea what that means.Chi Sao in Wing Chun is classical and very effective.Hubud in Kali is also classical and in my opinion more effective since it is done with every combination of weapon and empty hand possible.The technology of Kali is very advanced and it is classical in the sense that is is an ancient system and it is still practiced the way it has always been without any modification.As to nonclassical anything, keep in mind martial arts have been around longer than most of us on this board, so whatever anybody thinks is a "modification" has probably been done before.So in the words of my instructor Dan Inosanto, you can never invent your own techniques, only discover what you did not see before. Barry www.combatartsusa.com y


----------



## achilles (Mar 17, 2005)

Wow, you're up late too!

I agree, there is nothing new under the sun.  When I was twelve or thirteen I though I invented puter kapala from Silat.  Who knew?

Range is a good teaching tool, but you're totally right about overlap and intersection.  I think that the more abstract temporal spacial relationship is a better model, but range and rhythm are easier to understand.  I also think that the distinction between classical and non-classical as well as traditional and ecclectic are illconceived.  All arts are ecclectic at least at some time in their development when the founder was laying out his curriculum.  He took from here and there, either from external sources or his own experience (often a combination of both) and put together a model he thought explained combat.  If it stuck around long enough it became classical, but for its time it might have been revolutionary.


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 17, 2005)

Achilles,The only time I can actually hang out online undesturbed is late night.In the beginning you had people that used martial arts to stay alive, PERIOD. It was not a vocation or a hobby but to stay alive.As far as the Kali I do as taught by Dan Inosanto,there was no curriculum when he was learning.People like Angel Cabales and Floro Villabrail had no teaching system.Their respective students put things together as far as progression.In the 60s if you trained with a Filipino master it was"come at me like this, I do this" There was no talk of ranges and scientific theories.These were full contact death match survivors.Years later people that have no idea of life or death combat talk about theories and techniques.My former teacher Paul Vunak would call these people armchair generals.There are a lot of the JKD/Kali trapping curiculum I dont teach because they wont happen but are taugh for reasons other than combat like body mechanics and so on.I hate to say it but there are things you can only truly understand by living a violent life.Not in the PAL, not in ANY ring situation, and not in any martial art school.Either in prison or in the street is were you learn to apply your training.The masters of old were veterans of combat not Martial art school trained experts.Barry  www.combatartsusa.com sanp


----------



## achilles (Mar 17, 2005)

Barry,

I am an instructor under Dan Inosanto.  I know what his curricula are like and I have a good understanding of the sources from which they came.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 17, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Years later people that have no idea of life or death combat talk about theories and techniques.My former teacher Paul Vunak would call these people armchair generals.www.combatartsusa.com sanp


So do you see the vast majority of us as armchair generals?


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Mar 17, 2005)

akja said:
			
		

> So do you see the vast majority of us as armchair generals?


I'm curious about that as well.  I would think that most of my instructors have been fortunate enough to not have to personally have been in "life-or-death" combat to know what works, or to be able to train effectively.  At what point is someone an armchair general?  Are we all (except for those like LEOs and others who have had to get into an awful situation)?


----------



## JKogas (Mar 17, 2005)

As for what Vunak thinks...well, as Mom always told me, if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.


-John


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 18, 2005)

Whoa guys, i didnt mean to offend half the world here.In my defense I wiil say that as an Instructor and martial artist I come from a certain mindset.I have seen fellow officers get beaten half to death and I have seen a person with aprox 20 stab wounds refuse to be strapped to a gurney by 6 cops.I PERSONALY have seen such ultra violence in my life that I know it takes a lot more than training in someones school to deal with some of the possible things life can through your way. Lets say your walking down the street and coming the other way is a 35 year old male that was sexually abused as a child,beaten regularly by his stepfather,and just got out of prison serving 9 out of a 20 year bid for killing someone with a knife in a bar.In prison this person killed three people with his hands.This person understands pain and he understands combat.He also doesnt care if he lives or dies. I train to beat that guy.Surviving a life or death fight with that individual will depend on your understanding of violence, not your training.Im not putting anybody down on this board Im here to make friends not cause controversy, but Ive seen things and been caught up in the middle of things that only a certain "attitude" can get you out of.The ability to get as primal and as violent as the maniac trying to kill you.Barry  www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## JKogas (Mar 18, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Whoa guys, i didnt mean to offend half the world here.In my defense I wiil say that as an Instructor and martial artist I come from a certain mindset.I have seen fellow officers get beaten half to death and I have seen a person with aprox 20 stab wounds refuse to be strapped to a gurney by 6 cops.I PERSONALY have seen such ultra violence in my life that I know it takes a lot more than training in someones school to deal with some of the possible things life can through your way.






But it DOES take training. It simply takes functional training. Beyond that is life and luck, just as with everything else. Just because the masters of old had to deal with violence, doesnt make their students anymore capable of dealing with it themselves. So in a very real sense, were ALL pretty much having to train and then take our chances with it all in a roll of the dice when and IF the time comes. And Ill take those chances. What are the alternatives?



Sure, it goes WAY beyond technique. It goes into the spirit and mindset of the practitioner. Each individual has to develop that. That comes from experience and to an extent, is already either there or not within the individual. Its heart. Some people have more of it than others. 





			
				Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Lets say your walking down the street and coming the other way is a 35 year old male that was sexually abused as a child,beaten regularly by his stepfather,and just got out of prison serving 9 out of a 20 year bid for killing someone with a knife in a bar.In prison this person killed three people with his hands.This person understands pain and he understands combat.






He understands it from an emotional level. He may or may not understand it from a technical level. I agree that both are important. But whats the point here? You train to beat emotional guys, or technical machines who are capable of taking you apart in a very calm manner? 



Which is more dangerous? I would think both, wouldnt you? 





			
				Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> He also doesnt care if he lives or dies. I train to beat that guy.


 


And again, thats still simply emotion. A guy may or may not care if he lives or dies  but that still doesnt necessarily make him a competent fighter. He may still get easily knocked out. He may still expose his back, etc., etc. Emotion is one thing, and its a factor. But emotional guys do stupid things as well and tend to make mistakes. Any seasoned fighter would school someone like that. Any seasoned fighter would also do well to learn to deal with that kind of unbridled emotion  which I think is your point. I would agree in that case. And perhaps its just me, but ANY sort of alive training develops ones ability to deal with that very pressure  if one has pressure tested him/herself. And if a person HASNT pressure tested himself against full on resistance (and *not* from a guy in a bulletman suit either), then they really havent taken themselves to that next level.





			
				Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Surviving a life or death fight with that individual will depend on your understanding of violence, not your training.





I dont necessarily agree. Thats because ones training should be taken to a level high enough for the adrenaline to become a factor. Ones in the water, its just the same swimming that youre always doing and have always done. Its the PRE fight that is going to nail someone, IMO.





			
				Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Im not putting anybody down on this board Im here to make friends not cause controversy, but Ive seen things and been caught up in the middle of things that only a certain "attitude" can get you out of.The ability to get as primal and as violent as the maniac trying to kill you.Barry www.combatartsusa.com


http://www.combatartsusa.com[/quote]



Its all good man. I appreciate your input. I think were all probably very close to the same general notions philosophically. Its the words that get in the way of most of our communication. 





-John


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 18, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> I PERSONALY have seen such ultra violence in my life that I know it takes a lot more than training in someones school to deal with some of the possible things life can through your way.


Well, Mr. Cuda, if you don't believe you have anything to add specifically to the trapping discussion, your involvement is not mandatory.  If you care to discuss your experiences otherwise, please start a new thread to deal with the topic.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Mar 18, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Whoa guys, i didnt mean to offend half the world here.In my defense I wiil say that as an Instructor and martial artist I come from a certain mindset.I have seen fellow officers get beaten half to death and I have seen a person with aprox 20 stab wounds refuse to be strapped to a gurney by 6 cops.I PERSONALY have seen such ultra violence in my life that I know it takes a lot more than training in someones school to deal with some of the possible things life can through your way. Lets say your walking down the street and coming the other way is a 35 year old male that was sexually abused as a child,beaten regularly by his stepfather,and just got out of prison serving 9 out of a 20 year bid for killing someone with a knife in a bar.In prison this person killed three people with his hands.This person understands pain and he understands combat.He also doesnt care if he lives or dies. I train to beat that guy.Surviving a life or death fight with that individual will depend on your understanding of violence, not your training.Im not putting anybody down on this board Im here to make friends not cause controversy, but Ive seen things and been caught up in the middle of things that only a certain "attitude" can get you out of.The ability to get as primal and as violent as the maniac trying to kill you.Barry www.combatartsusa.com


I believe you are talking about a *different kind* of training, a kind of psychological readiness and, perhaps, necessary cynicism of others, for your profession.

Most people walking into training won't necessarily be there for the same reasons - I think that's what I was referring to.  Is training trapping drills, or learning to use trapping in sparring, useful?  I think so.  I was questioning what you posted previously because it sounded as if this psychological training is the most paramount, for everyone.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 18, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Whoa guys, i didnt mean to offend half the world here.In my defense I wiil say that as an Instructor and martial artist I come from a certain mindset.I have seen fellow officers get beaten half to death and I have seen a person with aprox 20 stab wounds refuse to be strapped to a gurney by 6 cops.I PERSONALY have seen such ultra violence in my life that I know it takes a lot more than training in someones school to deal with some of the possible things life can through your way. Lets say your walking down the street and coming the other way is a 35 year old male that was sexually abused as a child,beaten regularly by his stepfather,and just got out of prison serving 9 out of a 20 year bid for killing someone with a knife in a bar.In prison this person killed three people with his hands.This person understands pain and he understands combat.He also doesnt care if he lives or dies. I train to beat that guy.Surviving a life or death fight with that individual will depend on your understanding of violence, not your training.Im not putting anybody down on this board Im here to make friends not cause controversy, but Ive seen things and been caught up in the middle of things that only a certain "attitude" can get you out of.The ability to get as primal and as violent as the maniac trying to kill you.Barry  www.combatartsusa.com



SBC,
No offense taken except if most are armchair generals then I'm a mere captain, but still a soldier, _with my cup half empty_.

I think that many have seen what you've seen or similar, maybe not as extreme, maybe more. I think the more you hang around here you'll find that theres a lot of experience floating in here.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 19, 2005)

I take JKD and think of it as that trapping is one route to clinching--not a preferred route, just the one you might take in certain cases. This is a PFS school (i.e., Paul Vunak's organization) where getting control of the head and launhcing a HKE elbow attack is a preferred roue, and so it may reflect his approach more than anything else...or my limited understanding.

But, to me trapping is obstruction removal (as we say in Modern Arnis), whereas clinching is control, or a battle for same.


----------



## Nanalo74 (Mar 21, 2005)

Has anyone read the "Realities of Street Violence" thread in the General Self Defense section? Some great video of actual street encounters. Street violence is brutal and unpredictable, and rarely resembles the classroom setting. We try to approximate as best we can, but the fact is until you've got some maniac trying to take your life, you really don't know how you will react. 

When I played football, we practiced all week for the big game. But it wasn't until you lined up across from that 280 lb. lineman and had him try to knock you on your tail did you know what it was like to play the game. Some guys looked great on the practice field, but folded up like a chair when it was time to perform.

Scientists test and test new medications all the time, but until they test it in an actual human being they really don't know what it will do in the hostile environment that is the human body. How many drugs have to be recalled due to unforseen reactions once a patient takes them?

All of our preparation is theoretical until we are forced to survive an actual life and death situation. 

Just my 2 cents.

Vic www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## achilles (Mar 21, 2005)

I think an important phase in using trapping, as well as any other skill against a resisting opponent, is the practice of said skill in an environment where the cue to use it is fairly random (yet recuring to get enough repetitions to sufficiently establish the skill in your mind/body).  I have designed a set of drills that work trapping off a random parry/block and I think they have a lot to offer as far as translating technique and theory into actual practice.  Split second awareness and adaptability are key IMHO.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 21, 2005)

Welcome Vic, I know you and Barry probably have a ton of info to share and we look forward to it. 

And you're right but I think a lot of confusion comes from the distintion between intercepting and trapping. People think trapping is too hard because they are thinking "intercepting" which are related but not one in the same. Intercepting is not easy. It happens but not if one looks for it. it just happens. 

Trapping is used all the time in various ways. I really don't think that a good example is one of the correctional facility. Way to many variables. Probably more times than not the cops (with weapons ans more cops with weapons nearby) out number the inmate when in the process of subdueing. Not a good example. Or wittnessing stab victims. The actual fighters, stabber and stabbee, might work.

Trapping works if one knows it. 1 tool in the tool box, used when needed. It does not need to be "validtated" as a qualifying technique if the qualification process means if we haven't used it yet, then we must find a way to use it.

Then we'd be just brawlers and not martial artists.


----------



## Nanalo74 (Mar 21, 2005)

Thank you, Akja, for the welcome. I enjoy reading everyone's views on all these topics. I just hope everyone takes each other's views in the proper spirit, which should be one of honest debate and friendly dialogue.

I think that too often when people hear the word "trapping", they get visions of lop sao drills dancing in their heads. Trapping is a range. When a person is trapped, they are immobilized. They can't move, and are at your mercy for the follow-up.

Trapping Range is a transient state. We're not gonna stay there going trap for trap with someone (no matter how cool it looks in the movies). We're only there long enough to finish the fight or to move into grappling range (and finish the fight).

It's not something you look for. It's something that happens; incidental if not accidental.

Vic www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 21, 2005)

Nanalo74 said:
			
		

> Thank you, Akja, for the welcome. I enjoy reading everyone's views on all these topics. I just hope everyone takes each other's views in the proper spirit, which should be one of honest debate and friendly dialogue.
> 
> I think that too often when people hear the word "trapping", they get visions of lop sao drills dancing in their heads. Trapping is a range. When a person is trapped, they are immobilized. They can't move, and are at your mercy for the follow-up.
> 
> ...


I agree. Theres a big differance between drilling and knowing. I'm big on ranges. Trapping comes and go's. I teach the drills because thats where the sensitivity comes from but at the same time I teach the submissions that are there at that very moment also. Plan A is always followed by plan B,C,D & E.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 21, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> I take JKD and think of it as that trapping is one route to clinching--not a preferred route,



I see it like that too but that is also where I want to be, the range of destruction. 

Yes trap and clinch are differant but related. Wasn't it Remy that said something like if you can make the connection, you can make the translation? I know you know what I mean. How does that saying go? It's a good one.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 21, 2005)

Well, Remy Presas was big on going with the flow, and connecting arts as well as making connections from one state in combat to another--basically the moving between ranges idea. (I'm not sure of the specific quote!) He also emphasized countering the counter, which is a big part of the idea of lop sao/pak sao to my mind. In Modern Arnis it was called obstruction removal but it's the same thing.

But, I also agree with what was said about not focusing so much on lop sao/pak sao.


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 21, 2005)

Hey guys,Im back and I truly hope I dont make everybodys blood boil.Im just trying to share 20 years of teaching and combat experience.On the subject of trapping, more precicely compound trapping which is practiced so diligently,it will NEVER happen.One thing I learned from Vunak in the 80s is even people who are trained will not give you the rear hand when you Pak and hit.As long as Ive been teaching when I teach trapping,Ill Pak the lead hand and throw a shot.After the student gets hit in the head Ill say block this shot with the rear hand.It still takes about half a dozen times to get used to blocking the rear shot.It is Not a normal reaction.When the majority of people get Pak Soa ed hard they always flinch on the shot.I admit I never had a streetfight with a Wing Chun Man but I believe they are the only ones that will react to it.Intence center line training is what gives the reaction to block when your front hand is trapped.Thats why Vunak, Paks, hits and then blasts without a second trap.To now contradict myself I, teach JKD trapping Kali Trapping and the Wing Chun I learned privatley from Randy Williams in its entirety because it is important to have the sensitivity and know all the possible lines and counters.Also learn the art for the arts sake.I reaize a lot of people took my previous comments the wrong way and I apologise, but real life combat is a scary thing and one should be prepared for it.BTW in a correctional setting the officer is ALWAYS outnumbered by the inmates.Overcrowding and buget cuts make it a very dangerous job,and where I worked we were allowed NO weapons on our person,just cuffs. Barry  www.combatartsusa.como


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 22, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Well, Remy Presas was big on going with the flow, and connecting arts as well as making connections from one state in combat to another--basically the moving between ranges idea. (I'm not sure of the specific quote!) He also emphasized countering the counter, which is a big part of the idea of lop sao/pak sao to my mind. In Modern Arnis it was called obstruction removal but it's the same thing.
> 
> But, I also agree with what was said about not focusing so much on lop sao/pak sao.


I train very similar. I know people probably have doubts (theres only 1 way to find out) but all of technique flows together. Anything can be used in conjunction with any other technique at any time.

Thats Gung Fu. JKD the art (or concept,art) with little Gung Fu stills does the same thing. I just have a focus more in the trapping range where I'm at home. :asian:


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 22, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Hey guys,Im back and I truly hope I dont make everybodys blood boil.Im just trying to share 20 years of teaching and combat experience.On the subject of trapping, more precicely compound trapping which is practiced so diligently,it will NEVER happen.One thing I learned from Vunak in the 80s is even people who are trained will not give you the rear hand when you Pak and hit.As long as Ive been teaching when I teach trapping,Ill Pak the lead hand and throw a shot.After the student gets hit in the head Ill say block this shot with the rear hand.It still takes about half a dozen times to get used to blocking the rear shot.It is Not a normal reaction.When the majority of people get Pak Soa ed hard they always flinch on the shot.I admit I never had a streetfight with a Wing Chun Man but I believe they are the only ones that will react to it.Intence center line training is what gives the reaction to block when your front hand is trapped.Thats why Vunak, Paks, hits and then blasts without a second trap.To now contradict myself I, teach JKD trapping Kali Trapping and the Wing Chun I learned privatley from Randy Williams in its entirety because it is important to have the sensitivity and know all the possible lines and counters.Also learn the art for the arts sake.I reaize a lot of people took my previous comments the wrong way and I apologise, but real life combat is a scary thing and one should be prepared for it.BTW in a correctional setting the officer is ALWAYS outnumbered by the inmates.Overcrowding and buget cuts make it a very dangerous job,and where I worked we were allowed NO weapons on our person,just cuffs. Barry  www.combatartsusa.como


Are you saying that you don't practice against a jab and a cross? Thats the one thing that I do focus heavy. My students need to know how a streefighter, boxer, kickboxer, Karate, Ju Jitsu and Gung Fu "type" will come at them. I tell them that I'm teaching them to beat all the systems that I've trained. Obviuosly that is a bold statement, but definately a positive step forward, compared to most systems being confined to "their" system.


----------



## Nanalo74 (Mar 22, 2005)

akja said:
			
		

> Are you saying that you don't practice against a jab and a cross? Thats the one thing that I do focus heavy. My students need to know how a streefighter, boxer, kickboxer, Karate, Ju Jitsu and Gung Fu "type" will come at them. I tell them that I'm teaching them to beat all the systems that I've trained. Obviuosly that is a bold statement, but definately a positive step forward, compared to most systems being confined to "their" system.


I know this question was directed to Barry, but I'll answer it since I'm his student. We do practice the jab-cross, and defend against it. The point he was making is that in real life when you pak in on someone, they never get that rear hand up to block the shot. Again, he cited the fact that he's never had to fight someone trained in Wing Chun. For that matter, neither have I so they may be the exception. As I said before, actual streetfights are a lot different from the classroom. We train for all contingencies of course, but we have to remember that our training is developing attributes that we'll need later. Drills are just that - drills.

Vic www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 22, 2005)

Nanalo74 said:
			
		

> I know this question was directed to Barry, but I'll answer it since I'm his student. We do practice the jab-cross, and defend against it. The point he was making is that in real life when you pak in on someone, they never get that rear hand up to block the shot. Again, he cited the fact that he's never had to fight someone trained in Wing Chun. For that matter, neither have I so they may be the exception. As I said before, actual streetfights are a lot different from the classroom. We train for all contingencies of course, but we have to remember that our training is developing attributes that we'll need later. Drills are just that - drills.
> 
> Vic www.combatartsusa.com


That was the answer I was expecting. If a strike gets that close that you "need" the rear hand, you can't miss or you will be likely be hit.


----------



## Nanalo74 (Mar 22, 2005)

Agreed.


----------



## brothershaw (Mar 22, 2005)

From my perspective (I am not an expert or meaning to offend)

You take trapping ( actually traps, openings, and chi sau in general) seperate it from its original format (wing chun) and put pieces of it in JKD and misunderstand.

Some of the things done in wing chun are done as learning tools, and also because the person you may be doing them to also knows what you know adn may try it on you.
It doesnt mean that someone throws a punch and then you try to trap and next thing its a chi sau match regardless of how they fight

I am leaving out big chunks but I believe alot of the point is being missed. I am actually agreeing with Cuda, and trying to take his explanation a step or 2 further, just botching the post. 

Some of the things in chi sau/ trapping/ wing chun 
1-for sensitivity, skill development
2-for a fighter type similiar to you (wing chun,maybe some other southern close range style)
3-for anybody else (intermediate range fighter (bigger movements)
for someone who doesnt know the system but watches/ copies the training 
they cant tell the difference between the 3 or when to use what techniques they take

You can say this for  any style if you take a segment out of context


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 22, 2005)

Hi brothershaw. I understand that you are not meaning to offend, however, when you make a statement such as: "_You take trapping ( actually traps, openings, and chi sau in general) seperate it from its original format (wing chun) and put pieces of it in JKD and misunderstand", _without qualifying it with where you see a misunderstanding, it will be assumed that you are referring to everyone's posts on the topic so far.

So, where do you see that someone is misunderstanding?



> It doesnt mean that someone throws a punch and then you try to trap and next thing its a chi sau match regardless of how they fight


 I don't see where anyone has implied that this is the case at all.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 22, 2005)

I think that brothershaw is offering his interpetation. He has a Wing Chun background and knows what he is trying to say. 

But when "we" cross over into the JKD realm "one" needs to understand that everything is open to interpetation. What works for "me" might not work for "you" and for anyone to think that something has to be done in a certain way violates what JKD represents.


----------



## brothershaw (Mar 22, 2005)

Exactly....
 Taking anything and applying it to JKD Using JKD principles not all of it is going to fit, not the way you might think it should according to JKD principles.

Flatlander- Someone punches, you pak sao and punch back, he punches  with his rear hand you do what
a- counter his rear hand with your hand that was punching him, wind up squared off and have the start of a chi sau match
b-pass his rear hand thatcomes at you, step and angle and are now on his other blind side still have advantage to a degree and finish him off?
c- ignore the rear hand because you have hit him repeatedly,moved to clinch range already and are  finishing him off?
d- he actually counters your pak sao and punch, friendly chi sau match again or does he finish you off ?

You pak his punch, he punches with his rear hand in response/reaction
a- your pak wasnt good
b-he had alot of forward momentum somehow (feet, waists, hips?)
c- he knows pak sao / wing chun/ jkd?

I know the earlier post was sounding kind of wrong but I was in a rush. 
You have to play with the traps, for me there is like 20 other things that are interconnected that I am  concerned about in addition to not getting hit so I can start hitting and keep hitting.

Criticism is welcome.


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 22, 2005)

Brothershaw, all I can honestly say is that I don't go into it with a mindset of "do this or do that".  If a trap is there, I may trap, I may not.  I don't think I can predict what happens under any circumstance.  I train to trap because it may come in handy.  In your scenario, I'm entering on his first punch.  I'm doing some lin sil die dar, maybe I'm destroying.  I can't really say from here.

I see what you're saying, though.  The truth is, there are no short term solutions; there are no magic moves.  You just need to train the fundamentals and trust your body to respond when the time is right.


----------



## Sifu Barry Cuda (Mar 23, 2005)

Guys, first off my comments about trapping in class and in the street seem to be a little misunderstood.Against a person that is not trained extensivley in trapping will not block the shot.Been there done that.  Lets say faceing off against someone the first thing I do is blast the shin with a low kick.As soon as my foot lands I Pak his front hand HARD and throw my shot.I f he is not trained in trapping he will not react to that shot and throw up a rear barrier.The way I teach a Pak sao it has to hurt and if you dont train your forearms it will hurt.A basic combo in JKD is to Pak the front hand,throw a backfist and then throw a cross.Chi Sao and Hubud are trained to deal with a clash in trapping range-how to move your opponents hands around to give you a more favorable position.The problem is some people think after all the back and forth drills we do is that an opponent will go counter to counter with you.One of the things I train my advanced guys is for them to trap on me and I counter with the sloppy wild things most streetfighters do.I play the part of the boxer or grappler and show how to deal with that.Then one can see how the concepts and techniques of trapping are used 'for real" Barry www.combatartsusa.com


----------



## brothershaw (Mar 23, 2005)

Agreed, a simpler way to say what I was trying to say.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 23, 2005)

Sifu Barry Cuda said:
			
		

> Guys, first off my comments about trapping in class and in the street seem to be a little misunderstood.Against a person that is not trained extensivley in trapping will not block the shot.Been there done that.  Lets say faceing off against someone the first thing I do is blast the shin with a low kick.As soon as my foot lands I Pak his front hand HARD and throw my shot.I f he is not trained in trapping he will not react to that shot and throw up a rear barrier.The way I teach a Pak sao it has to hurt and if you dont train your forearms it will hurt.A basic combo in JKD is to Pak the front hand,throw a backfist and then throw a cross.Chi Sao and Hubud are trained to deal with a clash in trapping range-how to move your opponents hands around to give you a more favorable position.The problem is some people think after all the back and forth drills we do is that an opponent will go counter to counter with you.One of the things I train my advanced guys is for them to trap on me and I counter with the sloppy wild things most streetfighters do.I play the part of the boxer or grappler and show how to deal with that.Then one can see how the concepts and techniques of trapping are used 'for real" Barry www.combatartsusa.com


I think I hear you now. You just stated something I touched on earlier. We do the drills but not traditional chi sao. At a higher level a student can and will get better by training their chi sao but early on they need to know ALL the things they could accomlpish using trapping as an entry.


----------



## NotQuiteDead (Apr 14, 2005)

I don't think of clinching at trapping. When you trap, you're moving something out of the way to strike. When you're clinching, you don't just move something out of the way, you are continually _controlling_ the opponent.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Apr 14, 2005)

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> I don't think of clinching at trapping. When you trap, you're moving something out of the way to strike. When you're clinching, you don't just move something out of the way, you are continually _controlling_ the opponent.


I understand what's you're saying, but couldn't you say that a lop sau is a kind of control, control of body movement?

And do you always control the opponent in a clinch?


----------



## arnisador (Apr 14, 2005)

I think of lop sau more as obstruction removal--clearing a path.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Apr 14, 2005)

I think it can be both, depending on how it is used.  You may just remove an onstacle - or you may remove an obstacle whilst moving your opponent in a particular manner.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 14, 2005)

Yes, it's always good to drive your opponent off-balance, and I like to do that with such a technique. But, I think a lop sau has a primary purpose of clearing the way--it's a success if all it does is make room for the punch. I don't think I disagree with you, but I also don't think I'd use it for the kind of control I associate with a clinch--really keeping him from moving--as I think of a lop sau as more transient.

 Fundamentally, I think "clinch" is a useful concept with its own feel, and I believe it's helpful to keep it as its own category. But, it's also good to think outside the box!


----------



## JKogas (Apr 15, 2005)

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> I don't think of clinching at trapping. When you trap, you're moving something out of the way to strike. When you're clinching, you don't just move something out of the way, you are continually _controlling_ the opponent.


In the clinch, the idea IS to remove the obstruction from either working to strike or take your opponent down. Fundamentally, trapping and clinching are one and the same. It is only that you have more control over your opponent when you have such an attachment (as the clinch). The clinch is just a name. Their are a variety of different positions within the range known as the clinch. 

From hand fighting, to a collar and elbow tie up, to an underhook(etc) - all are methods of removing obstructions from your attempted attacks. That is precisely what "trapping" (in the traditional sense) was designed to do.


Cheers,

-John


----------



## ufsofpa (Feb 3, 2006)

well, lets just sy this. ive been in situations where trapping played a minor role. Trapping in a fight is removing a barrier to keep going with you intentions. Remember this quote by Paul Vunak,"In training we spend 95% trapping in classand 5% hitting, in a street fight it is the other side of the coin". So remember, in a fight, it goes so quick you may not trap, but that is not meening dont train it. Keep doing it, but remember you may not use it in a real world situation.
 Rick
 UFSOFPA rep.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 3, 2006)

Welcome to Martial Talk, Rick!  

I agree with your post there, we may not have the opportunity to use trapping, but the more we train it, the opportunities may present themselves.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 5, 2006)

In my opinion, "trapping" is a by-product of strking. The training I have in Wing Chun is to Hit. The wing chun person is dedicated to hitting but not to or with any particular hit or strike. The trap happens in the course of striking. If during the strike something happens to be in the way then if properly trained the wing chun person coverts the strike movement into a trap and continues with another strike. If one can actually hit with the strike then there is no reason to trap. The problems happen when one is more concerned with trapping rather than hitting or is dedicated to any one hit. There are several different ways to trap depending upon what the situation is. The simplest traps and hits during the same movement. Another clears the way even if only for an instant, others control the opponent's arm or leg from movement for a beat of time, some control the arm or leg from any movement, and some traps control the opponent's body movements or form or structure. However, it is all due to the proper placement of one's weapons and strike movement that traps happen otherwise one is trapping for trapping sake when one should be hitting.

Clinching is a form of trapping or controlling however the way it is used is quite different from WC trapping. Or at least from the trapping I have learned.

Danny Terrell


----------

