# Few techniques to beat many...



## geezer (Oct 3, 2014)

One of the basic concepts that originally attracted me to WC (coming from a complicated, mostly phony "Shaolin style") was the idea that we favor using a few techniques to beat many. The idea is that if the other guy knows a hundred ways to hit you, you master one technique to beat his hundred. Didn't Bruce Lee use that line? Anyway, I've always admired the minimalism of good WC. Unfortunately, people seem to complicate everything, even WC, especially when more techniques translates to more money for your school.

Any thoughts on that? ...or perhaps favorite examples of a single technique that beats many attacks? 

I'll start. The WC "sun-fist" punch.   My dad, who knows zilch about WC (he still asks me about "that karate stuff" I do) often told me that a good hard punch in the nose sure takes the fight out of a lot of people. And, he was right. Then again he's a retired ear, _nose _and throat doc, so maybe he was just building his business? Regardless, I find I can counter more things effectively with just a punch than any other technique.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 3, 2014)

And there is; "a punch is more than just a punch"


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 3, 2014)

Your techniques are just your root. There are many branches that need to come out of that root.

When you apply "hip throw", you opponent can:

- spin with you, 
- push you forward,
- pull you backward,
- lift you up,
- press you down,
- jump in front of you,
- stick on your leg,
- trap your leg,
- hook your leg,
- ...

When your opponent responds like that, you will need to change your "hip throw" into something else. You will need to be good in your "hip throw". You also need to be good in that "something else".


----------



## Kwan Sau (Oct 4, 2014)

Thx Geez...this should prove to be an interesting thread!!!

My vote: a well trained pak sau & punch, combined with the relevant footwork needed at that moment. This is one of my favorites, I have several more but.......


----------



## KPM (Oct 4, 2014)

geezer said:


> One of the basic concepts that originally attracted me to WC (coming from a complicated, mostly phony "Shaolin style") was the idea that we favor using a few techniques to beat many. The idea is that if the other guy knows a hundred ways to hit you, you master one technique to beat his hundred. Didn't Bruce Lee use that line? Anyway, I've always admired the minimalism of good WC. Unfortunately, people seem to complicate everything, even WC, especially when more techniques translates to more money for your school.
> 
> Any thoughts on that? ...or perhaps favorite examples of a single technique that beats many attacks?
> 
> I'll start. The WC "sun-fist" punch.   My dad, who knows zilch about WC (he still asks me about "that karate stuff" I do) often told me that a good hard punch in the nose sure takes the fight out of a lot of people. And, he was right. Then again he's a retired ear, _nose _and throat doc, so maybe he was just building his business? Regardless, I find I can counter more things effectively with just a punch than any other technique.




I agree Steve!   And what you are describing is called a "stop" in the old boxing method.   The second you see the opponent about to throw his punch, you beat him to the punch with a good stiff lead to the face!  This was one of the core things in Bruce's JKD.  And heck, just punch!  Too often we see WC guys trying to do some kind of "Chi Sauey" thing when all they need to do is put together a good combination of punches!  And I don't mean just driving forward with chain punches! I mean working the angles and being unpredictable just like a boxer.  Say my first punch is stopped.  Why go into some kind of Chi Sau controlling/trapping move if I can just punch on a different angle with the other hand!

You know, the more I think about and approach my Wing Chun as a boxing/punching method, the less and less value I am seeing in doing lots of Chi Sau.  Does that make me a heretic?


----------



## geezer (Oct 4, 2014)

OK here's another technique that beats many: The_ tut-sau_ or freeing hand movements as performed downward angle in the last section of S.N.T., or outward along centerline in Chum Kiu and Biu Tze. If applied with sufficient speed, these movements can effectively free the arm from a grapple or lock, clear the bridge, and create an opening, and strike through. 

Now in my FMA training, we have worked lock flow drills that string together locks and counters. It's fun training. There are lots of locks and lots of counters, but a proper WC _tut-sau and strike_ applied in time can take care of pretty much everything I've encountered _and_ put and end to the flow.

BTW since the forward "freeing arm" movement is also a strike, this is really just another way of using a punch to counter other techniques as mentioned in the first post.  Hmmm... _One technique to defeat many._ Again.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 4, 2014)

When you step aside movements themselves and look at angles and motion instead, you realize what the potential of a lot of WC techniques can be. I prefer not to look at it with a raw "technique->counter" approach because things aren't really all that clear cut in a fighting scenario.


----------



## geezer (Oct 4, 2014)

Marnetmar said:


> When you* set aside movements themselves and look at angles and motion instead*, you realize what the potential of a lot of WC techniques can be. I prefer not to look at it with a raw "technique->counter" approach because things aren't really all that clear cut in a fighting scenario.



Good point.


----------



## KPM (Oct 5, 2014)

Marnetmar said:


> When you step aside movements themselves and look at angles and motion instead, you realize what the potential of a lot of WC techniques can be. I prefer not to look at it with a raw "technique->counter" approach because things aren't really all that clear cut in a fighting scenario.



That sounds a lot like what the PB guys say.  ;-)


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 5, 2014)

geezer said:


> One of the basic concepts that originally attracted me to WC (coming from a complicated, mostly phony "Shaolin style") was the idea that we favor using a few techniques to beat many. The idea is that if the other guy knows a hundred ways to hit you, you master one technique to beat his hundred. Didn't Bruce Lee use that line? Anyway, I've always admired the minimalism of good WC. Unfortunately, people seem to complicate everything, even WC, especially when more techniques translates to more money for your school.
> 
> Any thoughts on that? ...or perhaps favorite examples of a single technique that beats many attacks?
> 
> I'll start. The WC "sun-fist" punch.   My dad, who knows zilch about WC (he still asks me about "that karate stuff" I do) often told me that a good hard punch in the nose sure takes the fight out of a lot of people. And, he was right. Then again he's a retired ear, _nose _and throat doc, so maybe he was just building his business? Regardless, I find I can counter more things effectively with just a punch than any other technique.




I also was attracted to WC because it was simple but manly because I was able to use it right away. In months I was able to use it effectly in street fights and walk away with no injuries major injuries. 

If a system is taught I do this technique and you respond with that technique this is where it gets to complicated for the student. I know for me that is how it was. IMO. If you show how say a Tan sao can be used in many ways the person will think in those terms instead of I do this he does that and I respond with this. So you can do more with less.


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 5, 2014)

I did Ving Tsun for a couple of weeks now but coming from a Indonesian martial arts background, it couldn't teach me that much anymore, I realised that all the principles taught in VT are all present in the arts I practiced. So I decided to keep doing what I was doing before VT.

So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners.

Just looking to expand my knifework now, even though I did eskrima in the past I feel that's one area that's not so good yet


----------



## geezer (Oct 5, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> I did Ving Tsun for a couple of weeks now but coming from a Indonesian martial arts background, it couldn't teach me that much anymore, I realised that all the principles taught in VT are all present in the arts I practiced. So I decided to keep doing what I was doing before VT.
> 
> So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners.
> 
> Just looking to expand my knifework now, even though I did eskrima in the past I feel that's one area that's not so good yet



WC/VT/WT includes a lot of different approaches, depending on the lineage, the school, and the instructor. Taking "Ving Tsun for a couple of weeks" is enough to gauge the feel of a particular school and whether it's a good fit for you, but it's not nearly enough time to understand the depth of the whole system! 

Regardless, the gist of this thread is more  about using _less do defeat more_, or _simplicity to counter complexity_. This is really more about the way you present and acquire knowledge than about system or style. You will see the same dichotomies in FMA, Silat, and just about any other system. One of my FMA instructors came from a system that began teaching with 12 strikes and 12 counters _for 144 movements just to start_, Then they added 12 grips, plus 12 steps, plus.... well, you get the idea. By contrast my instructor presented essentially the same material through three basic principles and then everything else falls into place. Simplicity vs. complexity.


----------



## yak sao (Oct 5, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners./QUOTE]
> 
> 
> I would believe you except I've seen it used successfully or have used it myself successfully against people trained in karate, shaolin, BJJ, catch wrestling, judo, Greco-Roman wrestling, kajukenbo, kenpo, TKD, JKD, Krav Maga, western boxing, pa kwa....I feel bad because I feel like I'm leaving someone out, but you get the idea.
> ...


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Oct 5, 2014)

yak sao said:


> Dylan9d said:
> 
> 
> > So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners./QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 5, 2014)

yak sao said:


> Dylan9d said:
> 
> 
> > So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners./QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## geezer (Oct 5, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> yak sao said:
> 
> 
> > I also "tested" some seniors at that school and for most things I threw at them they didn't had an answer, now *they were very good VT/WC practitioners, but only against untrained people* or fellow practitioners.
> ...


----------



## PiedmontChun (Oct 6, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> yak sao said:
> 
> 
> > The school that I tried was from Wong Shun Leung lineage.
> ...


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 6, 2014)

PiedmontChun said:


> Dylan9d said:
> 
> 
> > Whats with the recent trend in here of threads derailing into WC bashing? Quite honestly, if you feel this way (the above comment) then why are you here?
> ...


----------



## Argus (Oct 6, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Really? Someone criticize your martial art and the only thing you have to say is that wow I didn't knew WC guys had such long toes....
> 
> I just posted my recent experience and why I won't pursue WC and why I will stick with Silat



All due respect, we're not posting in the FMA forum about how "it's all good in theory but we see no substance."

Can't imagine we'd have a warm welcome if we did.


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 6, 2014)

Argus said:


> All due respect, we're not posting in the FMA forum about how "it's all good in theory but we see no substance."
> 
> Can't imagine we'd have a warm welcome if we did.



Well look at the title of the topic, "few techniques to beat them many....", I proved for myself many but not all 

Also, I was under the impression that this was a discussion forum, not a holding-hands meeting place...

Maybe I was wrong

And remember it's all personal experiences


----------



## PiedmontChun (Oct 6, 2014)

You had a "few weeks" of Ving Tsun and consequently you have your mind made up so my (rhetorical) question is valid. By this you seem convinced you have nothing to learn or gain from WC / WT / VT so why is anyone here going to argue with you and try and convince you otherwise? 

Personally, I would never go to a forum for an art I had minimal hands on experience with and act as if it was their job to prove to me their system's concepts or methods were effective. Its just bad form. 

Back to Geezer's original post, I am still amazed at the efficient simplicity of a single vertical fist punch being employed in different ways, whether with low elbow force to subdue /collapse an incoming punch from the outside, locking the elbow out to wedge out an incoming punch from the inside, using initial punch as wedge or to create space before replacing with the next punch.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Oct 6, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Well look at the title of the topic, "few techniques to beat them many....", I proved for myself many but not all
> 
> Also, I was under the impression that this was a discussion forum, not a holding-hands meeting place...
> 
> ...



The only thing you "proved" was that those particular guys couldn't handle what you threw at them.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 6, 2014)

WC circlejerk incoming!

It's a joke, please don't hurt me


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 6, 2014)

Folks,

It's one thing to discuss the relative merits of an art or school.  Or to discuss your personal experience and compare and contrast it with another style...  But we want to keep things respectful, too.  We all know someone in our own chosen art who we'd rather keep well out of sight, no?  One experience doesn't describe everyone in the art...


----------



## yak sao (Oct 6, 2014)

I'm fine with all the WC bashing.
The way I see it, let us keep flying under the radar and let people underestimate us.
That's just a few less people I have to be concerned about in a physical encounter.


----------



## Thunder Foot (Oct 7, 2014)

Not to continue to derail, I think the biggest issue when it comes to testing Wing Chun is folks limited view of what the art is. Like Piedmont said, most already have their mind made up about the art's effectiveness. So when you do get someone who has answers for these techniques "outside of Wing Chun" as people like to call it, they want to say that it's NOT WC. Hook punch, hook kick, or a lack of complicated trapping among others.  Someone lands an upper and suddenly is not using Wing Chun. I think a broader spectrum of view would help all on both sides of the fence.

Back to simplifying things, the vertical fist fits into many more holes that the horizontal fist may not. It's harder to detect due to the orientation of the fist.  It's structurally stronger for Wing Chun due to the WC structure. But it depends on the height of the target we are hitting. Lower punching targets have different hand positions. Simplifying is punching in response to the target presented.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 7, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> yak sao said:
> 
> 
> > The school that I tried was from Wong Shun Leung lineage.
> ...


----------



## geezer (Oct 7, 2014)

:lol2:





Thunder Foot said:


> I think a broader spectrum of view would help all on both sides of the fence.  *...the vertical fist fits into many more holes that the horizontal fist may not*.



Honestly I try to be open-minded and tolerate an ...er ..."broad-spectrum" as you put it, but what you said above _...just sounds wrong!  _:lol2:


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 8, 2014)

Vajramusti said:


> Dylan9d said:
> 
> 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...


----------



## mograph (Oct 8, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> ... the vertical fist fits into many more holes that the horizontal fist may not.


Yes, it's hard not to fixate on this phrase.

Looking for the right emoticon ... naah.


----------



## KPM (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> 5. maybe some people want to know if it really works in a streetfight, clearly WC *doesn't
> *



I'd love to see all the various videos of that you have of Silat working in a streetfight.  Please post them!


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 8, 2014)

KPM said:


> I'd love to see all the various videos of that you have of Silat working in a streetfight. Please post them!




Thought this was a WC topic? If you want to see some techniques that most likely would work on the streets just check youtube dude, i don't need to prove anything about Silat, you on the other hand with your experimental video's clearly do....


----------



## KPM (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Thought this was a WC topic? If you want to see some techniques that most likely would work on the streets just check youtube dude, i don't need to prove anything about Silat, you on the other hand with your experimental video's clearly do....



I don't need to check youtube for Silat, because I have trained it personally myself.   And yes, it is good stuff!  But so is the Wing Chun I have trained personally!  You are basing your opinion of Wing Chun on a limited encounter with one group of questionable skill and a few youtube videos.  My point was that if you were to base an opinion on Silat strictly on a bunch of youtube videos one could reach a negative impression as well.    So to continue to come to a  Wing Chun forum simply to slam Wing Chun is just asking for trouble.  Don't you think?


----------



## yak sao (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Thought this was a WC topic? If you want to see some techniques that most likely would work on the streets just check youtube dude, i don't need to prove anything about Silat, you on the other hand with your experimental video's clearly do....




No one here feels the need to prove anything. Many on this forum are accomplished martial arts practitioners, some with decades of experience.
WC is the art we chose and what we love. we love it for its outward simplicity, its subtle artistry, its inner depth...for a whole host of reasons. But one reason we who frequent this forum can all agree on is its effectiveness. 
We don't believe it to be effective because of stories and legends, or because our sifu says so. It's effective because we know it's effective because we've proven it to ourselves and others countless times.

You choose to think otherwise, that's fine. Coming on here and making gratuitous or anecdotal statements that WC doesn't work is not a discussion. It's looking for an argument.

So either discuss or go away and leave us poor diluted wing chunners to wallow in our ignorance.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> I did Ving Tsun for a couple of weeks now but coming from a Indonesian martial arts background, it couldn't teach me that much anymore, I realised that all the principles taught in VT are all present in the arts I practiced. So I decided to keep doing what I was doing before VT.
> 
> So VT is a beautiful simple art, but mostly very good against untrained or other VT practitioners.
> 
> Just looking to expand my knifework now, even though I did eskrima in the past I feel that's one area that's not so good yet





Dylan9d said:


> yak sao said:
> 
> 
> > The school that I tried was from Wong Shun Leung lineage.
> ...


----------



## Argus (Oct 8, 2014)

Dylan, I'll be straight forward. Forgive me; I'm a WC guy, after all.

Your statements exude arrogance, bias, and willful ignorance. Now, I say this with good intent, and as sincere advice: You don't know half of what you think you do. Empty your cup. Stop judging things you don't understand. Experience is not the best teacher; it can lead us to false assumptions, misconceptions, an inflated ego, and a closed mind. Instead, empty your cup. Be humble and open-minded above all else. Otherwise, you'll never even know how much you don't know, yet alone know as much as you think you do.


----------



## geezer (Oct 8, 2014)

Argus said:


> Dylan, I'll be straight forward. Forgive me; I'm a WC guy, after all.
> 
> Your statements exude arrogance, bias, and willful ignorance. Now, I say this with good intent...



Argus, you are _hilarious!_ Reminds me of really old Saturday Night Live, "Jane, you ignorant sluht!" And you say it with such kindness and good intent. 

Nevermind that I might agree with you, but just let him go. What do we care what uninformed people think. Now let's get this thread back on track. I can think of numerous examples of a simple technique that short circuit a variety of attacks. And this applies to other systems besides WC as well. I'd be open to people sharing from other styles. I mean this is a _concept-oriented_ topic. And good concepts are somewhat universal.


----------



## yak sao (Oct 8, 2014)

Back when I was first learning chi sau, my training brothers and I would inevitably hit stumbling blocks trying to figure things out.
A motto we quickly developed whenever we caught ourselves chasing hands or overcomplicating the situation was "Just Punch".

It really does seem to take care of many if not most situations....fighting I mean, not in normal life.

Snooty waiter...Just Punch. Boss won't give you a raise?...Just Punch.....Not a good idea.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 8, 2014)

Argus said:


> Dylan, I'll be straight forward. Forgive me; I'm a WC guy, after all.
> 
> Your statements exude arrogance, bias, and willful ignorance. Now, I say this with good intent, and as sincere advice: You don't know half of what you think you do. Empty your cup. Stop judging things you don't understand. Experience is not the best teacher; it can lead us to false assumptions, misconceptions, an inflated ego, and a closed mind. Instead, empty your cup. Be humble and open-minded above all else. Otherwise, you'll never even know how much you don't know, yet alone know as much as you think you do.




I would have to disagree about experience not being the best teacher.After you have a firm understanding of your art experience is what you need and only that experience can push you forward as a martial artist and for the art you represent. one example IMO is Wong Shun Leung. Without all his fighting exerience he would not be the man he was.


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 9, 2014)

Danny T said:


> Dylan9d said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan9d said:
> ...


----------



## Argus (Oct 9, 2014)

futsaowingchun said:


> I would have to disagree about experience not being the best teacher.After you have a firm understanding of your art experience is what you need and only that experience can push you forward as a martial artist and for the art you represent. one example IMO is Wong Shun Leung. Without all his fighting exerience he would not be the man he was.



Right. But, what made WSL great in my opinion was not just his experience, but his aim of applying Wing Chun's core principals pragmatically. 

It's very possible to take the wrong things away from experience. I've seen a lot of guys who modify their Wing Chun in ways that are not very congruent with the system's aims and core principals, because they find it "works for them." Others still develop bad habits that lead to success in the short term, but hinder their development in the long run, such as trying to speedily execute sloppy combinations, or just using strength.

I'm not a die-hard purest when it comes to technique in Wing Chun, but I am when it comes to it's core principals. Wing Chun is an art with a very specific aim and approach to fighting. And it's somewhat counter intuitive, and takes a lot of work to apply those principals pragmatically. But people can become good at anything they do, with time and experience, and that's why I think many people "get good" at "bad" Wing Chun through lots of sparring or chisau.

In short, you need to cultivate the _right_ _kind_ of experience.

And more than that, we need to recognize when our experience is simply too limited to draw on reliably. Dylan obviously based his opinion off of one month of training at a single Wing Chun school. Now, I'm sure he has far broader exposure to, and far more experience with Silat. His opinions are colored purely by his limited experience. I'm sure if he met some top-notch WC guys - preferably one kicking his *** - he would have a positive change in opinion


----------



## KPM (Oct 9, 2014)

*Nevermind that I might agree with you, but just let him go. What do we care what uninformed people think.*

---Yep. Good advice.  Its obvious he isn't listening to what we're saying and is here for only one purpose.  Ignore the trolls!
*
 Now let's get this thread back on track. I can think of numerous examples of a simple technique that short circuit a variety of attacks.*

---My next nominee is the simple, common Pak Sau!  If you watched clip #4 of my recent series you'll have seen me talk about the Pak Sau.  In Pin Sun WCK every solo set has a way to be practiced within the Pak Da drill.  So we do this drill as often as we do Chi Sau...maybe more often!  This means that we are doing LOTS of Pak Sau's and really "burning them into the system."    So a beginner gets a feel for Pak Sau and a straight punch before anything else.  So if he/she needs to use Wing Chun in a real situation before they've had time to learn very much, Pak Sau should be the main "go to" defensive move.  With your hands out in front in any kind of guard position, a Pak Sau with some footwork can be used to keep just about any punch from hitting you.  Even a wide swinging punch can be stopped with a good Pak Sau.  This ends up being on the inside, so isn't the best answer as it leaves you vulnerable to the opponent's other hand...but it can be done.   A Pak Sau/Gum Sau (which is essentially the same thing on a little different angle) can also be used to trap or pin an opponent's arm at the elbow in various circumstances.   A Pak Sau "straightened out" is a palm strike!  So essentially it can be used offensively as well as defensively.


----------



## KPM (Oct 9, 2014)

Argus said:


> In short, you need to cultivate the _right_ _kind_ of experience.



Exactly!   For example.  I was visiting a farm last weekend and the owner had two very large Newfoundland Retrievers playing in the meadow beside his house.  There was a car full of people already in the driveway but none of them dared to get out of the car.   I've been around dogs all my life and I know Newfies.  I just walked right up, didn't freak out at all when both dogs came charging up to me, and proceeded to hug, pet, and play with both of them!  After watching this for about 5 minutes, the people in the car slowly and cautiously got out of the car and came over to take pictures of me playing with the dogs!   These were people that likely didn't grow up with dogs as pets, and maybe had a negative experience with a dog as a child and had the impression that all big dogs are dangerous.   Their experience obviously didn't serve them well in this case.  ;-)


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 9, 2014)

Always funny to watch at Wing Tsun


----------



## Argus (Oct 9, 2014)

KPM said:


> Exactly!   For example.  I was visiting a farm last weekend and the owner had two very large Newfoundland Retrievers playing in the meadow beside his house.  There was a car full of people already in the driveway but none of them dared to get out of the car.   I've been around dogs all my life and I know Newfies.  I just walked right up, didn't freak out at all when both dogs came charging up to me, and proceeded to hug, pet, and play with both of them!  After watching this for about 5 minutes, the people in the car slowly and cautiously got out of the car and came over to take pictures of me playing with the dogs!   These were people that likely didn't grow up with dogs as pets, and maybe had a negative experience with a dog as a child and had the impression that all big dogs are dangerous.   Their experience obviously didn't serve them well in this case.  ;-)



Wow. That's bizarre. Is it that common for people not to have ever had any contact with dogs before? They must've all been city-slickers! 
Retrievers in general are pretty much just pure playful bundles of love and fur. I love 'em


----------



## geezer (Oct 9, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Always funny to watch at Wing Tsun



Thanks a lot dude. I'm actually in this clip (the compliant uke knocked to the floor at 1:56 -2:08). _Not _one of my more distinguished moments!  







...Then again the footage is over 30 years old. BTW, LT could be a real clown. Always doing crazy, unrehearsed demos and hamming it up like a bad actor in an old Shaw Bros. flick. But if you think he didn't know his stuff, you are seriously mistaken.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Oct 9, 2014)

KPM said:


> ---My next nominee is the simple, common Pak Sau!
> 
> ...a Pak Sau with some footwork can be used to keep just about any punch from hitting you.
> 
> ...



I completely agree with these statements


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Oct 9, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Always funny to watch at Wing Tsun



Lol what's he like flicking his hair? Hilarious!

Seriously dude, what exactly are you hoping to accomplish with your "contributions" to this thread?


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Oct 9, 2014)

geezer said:


> Thanks a lot dude. I'm actually in this clip (the compliant uke knocked to the floor at 1:56 -2:08). _Not _one of my more distinguished moments!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Kudos!


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 9, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Always funny to watch at Wing Tsun



Mother of god, what the hell was that?!


----------



## futsaowingchun (Oct 9, 2014)

Argus said:


> Right. But, what made WSL great in my opinion was not just his experience, but his aim of applying Wing Chun's core principals pragmatically.
> 
> It's very possible to take the wrong things away from experience. I've seen a lot of guys who modify their Wing Chun in ways that are not very congruent with the system's aims and core principals, because they find it "works for them." Others still develop bad habits that lead to success in the short term, but hinder their development in the long run, such as trying to speedily execute sloppy combinations, or just using strength.
> 
> ...



Only a person with considerable hard training and experience can fully understand what wing chun is. Someone like WSL trained his whole life and fought with wing chun and made it better. A person like that IMO is a true master.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 9, 2014)

geezer, looks like my instructor and me many years ago. Difference was I was not compliant. His remarks, "Dan you pretty good, you fall down pretty good. Get up and let's do it again." 
Did it many times with me hitting the floor most every time. Was quite sometime before I could keep standing. Perfected my falls and rolls though.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 10, 2014)

Dylan9d said:
			
		

> Ok now you are summing up all my replies, good, but what about the responses before that, this whole discussion started of with me posting my views on VT and in relation to the title of the topic, wich was also the reason i had nothing to find in the art of VT or WC. The point beeing that VT couldn't add anything to what i had learned already. I have still enough to learn in life and in martial arts because nobody is perfect. Hell im raising a 5 year old boy on my own, puts your right in your place and throws everything you know overboard
> 
> So you are showing a half picture here.



Yea, I quoted what you were stating during the conversations of this discussion even the first that you posted concerning the OP. In all of them you obviously do not like or feel wc has anything to help you grow and that it is only good against inexperienced persons or other wc practitioners. As I stated you don't like wc or you can't function with in it. Ok. 

As to, "but what about the responses before that". Uh, you got me there. Before what? This discussion? I am responding to your comments within this discussion. Where is the half picture? 

All of the arts are good, just different. I happen to know for me wing chun is good and I can use it, have used it against several different martial artists from silat, tai chi, muay thai, JKD, shotokan, hapkido, boxing, kali systems, judo, and just to name a few; so have my wc brothers and I have my students do the same. You didn't have a good experience with it and don't like it. Ok, got it. 

Many in the wc community do not go outside their systems to learn and to test their abilities just as many in the other arts also don't. My wc family does, we test against as many different systems we can. In my wc family my instructor requires all of us to train in other systems in order to know how to use wc against them. We don't talk about training against other systems or arts we don't have our wc brothers act like a muay thai fighter or a boxer, we actually train and spar muay thai fighters and boxers and there are other wc families that also do so. You simply have not interacted with them.  

All the best with your training in silat. Which by the way I agree can be a very good training system even though I have encounter some very poor silat practitioners.


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 10, 2014)

Danny T said:


> Yea, I quoted what you were stating during the conversations of this discussion even the first that you posted concerning the OP. In all of them you obviously do not like or feel wc has anything to help you grow and that it is only good against inexperienced persons or other wc practitioners. As I stated you don't like wc or you can't function with in it. Ok.
> 
> As to, "but what about the responses before that". Uh, you got me there. Before what? This discussion? I am responding to your comments within this discussion. Where is the half picture?
> 
> ...



You know as we get annoyed sometimes by people we put responses on a forum that if we think about it are a bit too harsh.

I don't dislike WC, i don't dislike WC practitioners and i do realise that the art is as good as it's practitioner but i do love the way how some people jump up like a nest of flees when you say something about their chosen art.

The art of Wing Chun or Ving Tsun is just not to my taste, thats what it boils down to.

I think the way your instructor is letting you train is good Danny. And yes there are very very poor Silat practitioners out there, enough charlatans, but thats in all types of martial arts.


----------



## KPM (Oct 10, 2014)

* but i do love the way how some people jump up like a nest of flees when you say something about their chosen art.*

---"a nest of flees (sic)"????  The reaction here has been very mild and polite compared to what it would have been on another forum I could name!  ;-)
*
The art of Wing Chun or Ving Tsun is just not to my taste, thats what it boils down to.*

---That's fine.  You are entitled to your opinion.  But then why are you continuing to post in a Wing Chun forum and push the point to Wing Chun guys?  Go and preach your point in the Silat forum and you will likely get a better reception.  Do you honestly believe if one of us was in the Silat forum saying exactly what you are saying but about Silat rather than Wing Chun that we would have gotten a different response?

---But here I am feeding the troll again.  Sorry guys!


----------



## Dylan9d (Oct 10, 2014)

KPM said:


> * but i do love the way how some people jump up like a nest of flees when you say something about their chosen art.*
> 
> ---"a nest of flees (sic)"???? The reaction here has been very mild and polite compared to what it would have been on another forum I could name! ;-)
> *
> ...



Wow somebody gets the title "troll" really easy with you don't they?

If someone criticizes something they are a troll? 
You having it really tough in real life i guess.


You should make a movie about that instead of your so called Youtube lessons.


----------



## KPM (Oct 10, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Wow somebody gets the title "troll" really easy with you don't they?
> 
> If someone criticizes something they are a troll?
> You having it really tough in real life i guess.
> ...



Yes.  You made your point. You said what little you have to say.  Anyone that continues to come to a forum just to cause trouble is simply a troll.  It has nothing to do with the quality of my life.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 10, 2014)

KPM said:


> Yes.  You made your point. You said what little you have to say.  Anyone that continues to come to a forum just to cause trouble is simply a troll.  It has nothing to do with the quality of my life.



I disagree with your opinion and here's why =/= troll

Why can't we have an honest discussion of the problems W.C faces without resorting to woo or personal attacks? I'm starting to think that WC's English name should be Cognitive Dissonance instead of Eternal Spring.


----------



## Argus (Oct 10, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> You should make a movie about that instead of your so called Youtube lessons.



"So called youtube lessons"? That's awfully low.

You have to admit, you're acting a bit like a troll. Why else post comments like these, or try to stir up trouble by posting a silly LT video? You pretend to want to take part in a meaningful discussion, but you haven't contributed constructively to this thread even once. All you've done thus far is try to provoke people and get under their skin, and then you criticize them for biting your bait. What's up with that?


----------



## Argus (Oct 10, 2014)

Marnetmar said:


> I disagree with your opinion and here's why =/= troll
> 
> Why can't we have an honest discussion of the problems W.C faces without resorting to woo or personal attacks? I'm starting to think that WC's English name should be Cognitive Dissonance instead of Eternal Spring.



I'm all for that, but I don't think such a discussion interests Dylan in the first place. Nor does he frankly know enough about WC to partake in it meaningfully. I'd rather hear from knowledgeable WC practitioners who test their stuff. Maybe then we can have a meaningful discussion, in a new thread, as opposed to just trying to derail random threads with general, undirected doubts about the effectiveness of WC as a whole.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Oct 10, 2014)

I thought this was a good thread that got horribly derailed, and yes, the definition of "troll" seems to fit aptly here.


----------



## wtxs (Oct 10, 2014)

Dylan9d said:


> Wow somebody gets the title "troll" really easy with you don't they?
> 
> If someone criticizes something they are a troll?
> You having it really tough in real life i guess.
> ...



Just to be fair to KPM, are you confident enough of your Silat to post some video for all to see?  And while you are at it, demo why, in your opinion WC is not effective.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 10, 2014)

Best to ignore the derailment and go back to the thread. 
It was interesting to see the video that geezer posted
and Leung Ting's  demo.
I am not a fan of Leung Ting and there are many versions of wing chun. One of the problems in discussions
is that people over generalize about what wing chun is or isn't.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 10, 2014)

I must say I have some pretty strong opinions about LT myself, but I'm not gonna go into that 

So, how about this whole Wing Chun thing everyone?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 10, 2014)

Since there is no master key, the MA training is to find the right key to open the right lock. So far, this discussion only stay in the boundary of the "striking art". If you can knock your opponent down before the clinch happen, that's fine. 

What if you can't knock your opponent down before the clinch happen? Can you still use "few techniques to beat many"? What will you do when your opponent gets 

- head lock,
- double over hooks,
- double under hooks,
- bear hug,
-...

on you?

- How do you get out of it? 
- How do you counter? 
- Does your "few techniques" still work at that moment?


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 10, 2014)

For me - yes. I don't depend on memorized techniques.


----------



## geezer (Oct 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Since there is no master key, the MA training is to find the right key to open the right lock. So far, this discussion only stay in the boundary of the "striking art". If you can knock your opponent down before the clinch happen, that's fine.
> 
> What if you can't knock your opponent down before the clinch happen? Can you still use "few techniques to beat many"? What will you do when your opponent gets
> 
> ...



There is no one perfect technique to apply to all such situations. I hope I did not imply that. But there are techniques that can be adapted to handle a great variety of situations. 

"Using a few techniques to beat many" is a strategy that can apply to many styles, and all ranges. It is an attitude or frame of mind that works for  better for some than others. Maybe it depends on your temperament or outlook? _Sort of like seeing the forest or the trees._

In wrestling, I knew a guy who had only one great takedown. And everybody knew it. But he could set you up so many ways, that it was really tough to counter --even though you_ knew_ it was coming!

Or how about Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. He had one great kick. Everybody knew it. But he could still land it.





Now here's an example more in the vein of my earlier observation about the "Sun-Fist" punch: 

My old escrima teacher was a huge advocate of simplicity. He could counter most of what came at him just by adjusting his angle and counter striking with astounding speed, force, and accuracy. 

If necessary, his strike would simultaneously function as deflection (or "interference strike") or as a block as needed. It was amazing how he could adapt (or "transition") the same basic dynamic into so many situations and ranges, with or without weapons. And always using a concept that we, in WC, know as _"da sau jik si siu sau"_ or "Attacking hand is defending hand" as well as _"lin siu di dar"_ or "simultaneous defense and attack".

One technique to beat many. A few techniques to beat all... if done _very very well._


----------



## zuti car (Oct 10, 2014)

First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters


----------



## drop bear (Oct 11, 2014)

geezer said:


> There is no one perfect technique to apply to all such situations. I hope I did not imply that. But there are techniques that can be adapted to handle a great variety of situations.
> 
> "Using a few techniques to beat many" is a strategy that can apply to many styles, and all ranges. It is an attitude or frame of mind that works for  better for some than others. Maybe it depends on your temperament or outlook? _Sort of like seeing the forest or the trees._
> 
> ...



But you still cannot escape complexity. The many different set ups timing and correct technique generally take years to perfect.


----------



## yak sao (Oct 11, 2014)

drop bear said:


> But you still cannot escape complexity. The many different set ups timing and correct technique generally take years to perfect.



If you move forward attacking the center, situations tend to take care of themselves. If your arms are properly relaxed and springy then your
punches either find their target or they are momentarily deformed into a tan ,bong ,jum ,etc. and immediately spring back out continuing on the attack. Same goes for the legs. They should be occupying the lower gate with kicks ,leg checks ,stop kicks and so on.

There is no set up. Only intercepting.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 11, 2014)

zuti car said:


> First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters



Sounds like somebody's trying to avoid a discussion


----------



## Argus (Oct 11, 2014)

zuti car said:


> First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters



"Techniques" in Wing Chun are more like a few basic shapes and structures which can flow from one to the next, depending on the pressure we encounter, or lack thereof. A punch is a bong is a tan is a hyun is a fuk is a jam is a strike is a jut, etc. Every action is an action in progress, and need not be committed to and completed, nor applied in any kind of sequence; it changes as necessary.

You can think of these "techniques" in Wing Chun as being grouped into three basic structures / concepts: tan, fuk, and bong, which morph one to the next to navigate any pressure or obstacles they encounter and flow through to find or create openings.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 11, 2014)

yak sao said:


> If you move forward attacking the center, situations tend to take care of themselves. ... There is no set up. Only intercepting.



If you are a wrestler, do you prefer to fight a boxer, or do you prefer to fight a WC guy? You may prefer to fight a WC guy for the following reasons:

A WC guy will love to

- move in toward you. He will not hop around, apply "fire" strategy, and move like a ghost.
- build "arm bridge" with you. It will save you 1/2 the effort to build the "clinch" that you are looking for.

If you look at this from a wrestler's point of view, the concept to "move forward" and "intercept" can be a 2 edges sword. It may help you. It may also help your wrestler opponent.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Oct 11, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A WC guy will love to
> 
> - move in toward you. He will not hop around, apply "fire" strategy, and move like a ghost.
> - build "arm bridge" with you. It will save you 1/2 the effort to build the "clinch" that you are looking for.



1. how does someone 'move like a ghost'? Never seen one myself... :lfao:
2. not all WC'ers seek to build "arm bridges"...


----------



## yak sao (Oct 11, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you are a wrestler, do you prefer to fight a boxer, or do you prefer to fight a WC guy? You may prefer to fight a WC guy for the following reasons:
> 
> A WC guy will love to
> 
> ...



Chi sau training is not simply a way to deal with strikers. Chi sau teaches a WC fighter how to deal with pressures placed on the body and arms. Chi sau does not teach us to stick for the sake of sticking. The goal is always to hit, and to do so in such a way as to keep ourselves protected behind our arm/legs.
If an opening is found, we continue to strike through it until we end the threat (ie. knock him out/down) or until the opponent closes it off. In which case the arms seek the least path of resistance once again seeking the opening to strike.
Force placed upon the arms and body by a grappler is dealt with in much the same way. Our structures that we use to dissolve, disperse, redirect a strike can also be used to keep a wrestler from tying up our arms or cause us to lose balance. All the while, punching, elbowing etc. Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.
WC was developed to fight in close. Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 11, 2014)

Kwan Sau said:


> 1. how does someone 'move like a ghost'? Never seen one myself ...


It's not that hard to do. If you just concentrate 100% your effort on not to let your opponent to touch you,

you can 

- forget about all your attack, 
- circle around your opponent,
- always move yourself into the symmetry position that your opponent intend to move,
- ...



yak sao said:


> Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.


You don't need to wrestle a wrestler. But you should get some wrestlers and test your skill against them. Try to spar a wrestler 15 rounds daily. The rules can be as simple as:

- If you can knock your wrestler opponent down first, you win that round. For safety issue, you can replace "knock down" by "your hand touches your opponent's face". 
- If your opponent can take you down first, he win that round. You can ignore the ground game and follow on strikes at this moment.

Try to test this for 3 months, collect the final result, modify your training, and develop your personal strategies.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 11, 2014)

yak sao said:


> Chi sau training is not simply a way to deal with strikers. Chi sau teaches a WC fighter how to deal with pressures placed on the body and arms. Chi sau does not teach us to stick for the sake of sticking. The goal is always to hit, and to do so in such a way as to keep ourselves protected behind our arm/legs.
> If an opening is found, we continue to strike through it until we end the threat (ie. knock him out/down) or until the opponent closes it off. In which case the arms seek the least path of resistance once again seeking the opening to strike.
> Force placed upon the arms and body by a grappler is dealt with in much the same way. Our structures that we use to dissolve, disperse, redirect a strike can also be used to keep a wrestler from tying up our arms or cause us to lose balance. All the while, punching, elbowing etc. Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.
> WC was developed to fight in close. Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?



Well we don't know if they did or didn't all we can look at is how it applies practically to that type of attack. Especially the very modern striking resistant grappling being used today.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 11, 2014)

yak sao said:


> Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?



I don't think any striking art system on this planet that has been tested completely against the grappling art system. 

If we look at the following "under hook counter" clip (at 0.23), it was used by a wrestler to against another wrestler. It's very difficult to find any "under hook counter" clip that is used by a striker to deal with a wrestler? Why? Because the concept of "under hook" may be foreign, or may be not important from a striker's point of view. A striker may not know that just by raising his arm straight up in the air can free his arm from under hook. Such a simple and effortless method to disable your opponent's "under hook" (of course to take advantage on it instead of just to escape out of it is much better solution). In other words, our striking art founders might not have tested their principles/techniques "enough" against wrestlers. If they did, those information should be recorded as part of the striking art system.

Of course, if you are just interested in "sport", a 

- Judo guy don't need to worry about the striking art.
- boxer don't need to worry about the grappling art. 

but if you care about "combat (some people may prefer to call it self-defense)", you do have to understand the other side of the fence.


----------



## geezer (Oct 12, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> ...A striker may not know that* just by raising his arm straight up in the air can free his arm from under hook*. Such a simple and effortless method to disable your opponent's "under hook" (of course to take advantage on it instead of just to escape out of it is much better solution). In other words, our striking art founders might not have tested their principles/techniques "enough" against wrestlers. *If they did, those information should be recorded as part of the striking art system.*



Recorded in the system? ...as in Biu Tze?


----------



## Kwan Sau (Oct 12, 2014)

geezer said:


> Recorded in the system? ...as in Biu Tze?



Yep!!! Right there... Well said Geezer.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 12, 2014)

I have not had problems with grapplers- ditto for my best students or my sihings.

You know who  just repeats his eclectic generalizations. His biu gee is awful.
He has already said that he does not do much chi sao. GOOD chi sao gives the skills in handling any touch.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 12, 2014)

> Recorded in the system? ...as in Biu Tze?


Yea. This is very close to how I learned it in our wc.
Uhh, hold on, that can't be... this would be grappling not striking.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 12, 2014)

In my training I've found that a lot of W.C applications are closer to grappling than striking.


----------



## KPM (Oct 12, 2014)

Marnetmar said:


> In my training I've found that a lot of W.C applications are closer to grappling than striking.



Wing Chun is a close range fighting method.  How can you NOT be grappling when you are in that close?  ;-)


----------



## yak sao (Oct 12, 2014)

KPM said:


> Wing Chun is a close range fighting method.  How can you NOT be grappling when you are in that close?  ;-)



Exactly. WC, like all other CMA has 4 components: kicking, punching, throwing and chin na.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 12, 2014)

KPM said:


> Wing Chun is a close range fighting method. How can you NOT be grappling when you are in that close? ;-)



B-b-but muh chainpunches!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 12, 2014)

Marnetmar said:


> B-b-but muh chainpunches!



If you understand that you should never pull back your punching hand without grabbing anything back, you have already crossed that boundary between striking and grappling.

Try not to think a punch is just a punch. A punch can be more than a punch. The chain punches can work well in the stand up game. It can also work well when you are on top of your opponent in the ground game.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 12, 2014)

True- and if you develop good wingchun live structural awareness and short power- close quarters is home.


----------

