# Simply to Simplify



## wingchun100 (Jan 18, 2017)

Okay, now I know from mentioning this guy in the other thread, his name is not met with anything that resembles fondness. However, I want to bring up something he said because, for me, it was another "lightbulb" type of moment.

In one of the Emin videos I watched, he mentioned how he didn't worry about the kind of attack that someone used against him. Instead, he just worried about angles.

Now in my opinion, one of the key features of Wing Chun is "simplicity." So for me, what he said clicked automatically. I was like, "Wow! Instead of worrying about the dozens of different ways someone could attack me, I worry about angles of attack? Well, shoot...there are a lot LESS of those!" It just made sense to me, and that idea seems to be in line with what I feel is one of (if not the) most important features of Wing Chun.

Naturally, I am sure there will be lots of disagreement. However, I hope it is respectful disagreement. Don't let hatred of Emin turn your responses into ones filled with bile toward ME. I'm just sharing a thought I had.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jan 18, 2017)

From what I've seen of him.  His fight experience may be limited to fighting against linear attacks.  Wing Chun Vs Wing Chun  so his statements may be in the context of Wing chun and linear attacks.


----------



## Buka (Jan 18, 2017)

I agree with him/that. And "angles" is as good a way to describe it as any.

I think the approach of "when this comes in instead of that" overcomplicates fighting. I think in training, if you start complicating based on what the other guy is doing, you start fighting his fight not yours. And I believe you fight like you train.

This shouldn't be confused with "adapting" which I think is the single most important, and overlooked, aspect of fighting, especially striking.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jan 18, 2017)

Buka said:


> I think in training, if you start complicating based on what the other guy is doing, you start fighting his fight not yours. And I believe you fight like you train.


I agree. Unfortunately the majority of martial arts schools teach from a reactive point of view.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 18, 2017)

A lot of stuff in martial arts is over-complicated.  Honestly, I see a lot of that in the wing chun discussions here.

I think angles may well be a better, less complicated way of looking at things.  You may need to study the different types of attacks in more detail, but with the goal of understanding their angles in order to then see it in less complicated terms.


----------



## Buka (Jan 18, 2017)

double post


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 18, 2017)

Buka said:


> I agree with him/that. And "angles" is as good a way to describe it as any.
> 
> I think the approach of "when this comes in instead of that" overcomplicates fighting. I think in training, if you start complicating based on what the other guy is doing, you start fighting his fight not yours. And I believe you fight like you train.
> 
> This shouldn't be confused with "adapting" which I think is the single most important, and overlooked, aspect of fighting, especially striking.


Agreed. In any MA, recognizing some way to lump attacks together into groups makes it easier to understand what's different as attacks change. So, for instance, we tend to talk about round vs. straight attacks. Those are not as distinctly separated as they sound, but it creates the rough ends of the spectrum. The adaptation (in part) is what you do to account for the myriad, smaller, differences within a group (so, how is a straight punch different from a straight stab, how is a straight short punch different from a straight long punch). FMA does the same thing with their angles (8 of them IIRC). It's a useful framework for generating the basics. "Advanced" stuff is often just the basics adapted better.


----------



## geezer (Jan 18, 2017)

Forgeting the BS lineage wars and/or personality issues, Emin is definitely somebody worth paying attention to. His WT is powerful and functional.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 18, 2017)

geezer said:


> Forgeting the BS lineage wars and/or personality issues, Emin is definitely somebody worth paying attention to. His WT is powerful and functional.


-----------------------------
Well stated.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jan 18, 2017)

geezer said:


> Forgeting the BS lineage wars and/or personality issues, Emin is definitely somebody worth paying attention to. His WT is powerful and functional.


In what context?  Wing Chun vs Wing Chun,  Wing Chun vs BJJ?  This is not to disagree with you, but the same strategy against one system is not always the same strategy that's required for another.   My strategy for using angles to fight is not a "one size fits all" strategy and I can only assume that he would have the same challenges that anyone of would have when fighting against someone from a different system.


----------



## marques (Jan 18, 2017)

Fights are chaotic and largely unpredictable. But in order to 'simplify', I predict what the opponent can do from his position and only a few dangerous things can be done from each distance. Adding to this a 'fake easy target', the opponent options are reduced to very few things. And if s/he doesn't start well, hardly will finish well. Ok, fighting is still chaotic, and surprises pop-up here and there... 

Perhaps different names for the same things. We all need our simplification methods in order to automatize procedures. And surprises to improve it. 

If we wait for any attack, out of every possibility, to select a reaction... too late, usually.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 18, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> In what context?  Wing Chun vs Wing Chun,  Wing Chun vs BJJ?  This is not to disagree with you, but the same strategy against one system is not always the same strategy that's required for another.   My strategy for using angles to fight is not a "one size fits all" strategy and I can only assume that he would have the same challenges that anyone of would have when fighting against someone from a different system.



A lot of BJJ is countered with good position. So the idea of angles is especially relevant. If you were not a BJJ guy then just learning the angles would be you highest percentage chance of controlling that system.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 18, 2017)

drop bear said:


> A lot of BJJ is countered with good position. So the idea of angles is especially relevant.


In striking art, if you can move into your opponent's "side door", his back hand can't punch you (except spin back fist). So the angle will make a big difference.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 18, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In striking art, if you can move into your opponent's "side door", his back hand can't punch you (except spin back fist). So the angle will make a big difference.



Yeah more than that though 

Say you are in guard with a bjj guy.  You would not be over thinking what armlock you need to defend. 

He needs to be off line. So you keep him straight.

He needs to break your posture. So you keep your posture. 

He needs control of your limbs.  So you deny him that control. 

Then just punch the guy. You don't even worry about your own submissions.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 18, 2017)

drop bear said:


> He needs to be off line. So you keep him straight.


This is why if you keep circling around your opponent, your opponent will only have 2 options:

- turn around with you, or
- attack you.

In either case, you just force your opponent to fight the way that you want to.

Here is an example.


----------



## wingchun100 (Jan 19, 2017)

geezer said:


> Forgeting the BS lineage wars and/or personality issues, Emin is definitely somebody worth paying attention to. His WT is powerful and functional.


 
I am  glad to read that. For a moment I thought I was crazy for watching his videos in amazement.


----------



## wingchun100 (Jan 19, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> In what context?  Wing Chun vs Wing Chun,  Wing Chun vs BJJ?  This is not to disagree with you, but the same strategy against one system is not always the same strategy that's required for another.   My strategy for using angles to fight is not a "one size fits all" strategy and I can only assume that he would have the same challenges that anyone of would have when fighting against someone from a different system.


 
I don't think Geezer meant between styles or anything like that. He basically just meant, "Emin is good. Forget his ego."


----------



## wingchun100 (Jan 19, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> A lot of stuff in martial arts is over-complicated.  Honestly, I see a lot of that in the wing chun discussions here.
> 
> I think angles may well be a better, less complicated way of looking at things.  You may need to study the different types of attacks in more detail, but with the goal of understanding their angles in order to then see it in less complicated terms.


 
It definitely makes it easier for me. Let's say for example there are only 8 angles from which someone can attack you. That is a lot less to worry about. If I think of how many techniques, I could really freak out! I mean, check this out:

jab punch
cross punch
hook punch
uppercut
roundhouse kick
hook kick
side kick
front kick
snap kick
spinning back kick
crescent kick
leg sweep

In just one sitting I already thought of 12 techniques, which outnumbers my angles. (Granted, I did not count out if there really are only 8 angles, but you get my point.)


----------



## wckf92 (Jan 19, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> It definitely makes it easier for me. Let's say for example there are only 8 angles from which someone can attack you. That is a lot less to worry about. If I think of how many techniques, I could really freak out! I mean, check this out:
> 
> jab punch
> cross punch
> ...



Nope...IMO there's really only about six angles.
Some of your listed items are in the same category (I.e. linear, looping, different vs same heights, etc).


----------



## wingchun100 (Jan 19, 2017)

wckf92 said:


> Nope...IMO there's really only about six angles.
> Some of your listed items are in the same category (I.e. linear, looping, different vs same heights, etc).


 
Well, like I said, I was just saying 8 to throw a number out there for my example.

As for the listed items falling in the same category, that is my point.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Jan 19, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> I don't think Geezer meant between styles or anything like that. He basically just meant, "Emin is good. Forget his ego."


Oh ok.


----------



## yak sao (Jan 19, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> I am  glad to read that. For a moment I thought I was crazy for watching his videos in amazement.



Emin was my Si-Fu for 10 years. As dynamic as he appears on video, until you've stood across from him.....


----------



## Juany118 (Jan 19, 2017)

wingchun100 said:


> Okay, now I know from mentioning this guy in the other thread, his name is not met with anything that resembles fondness. However, I want to bring up something he said because, for me, it was another "lightbulb" type of moment.
> 
> In one of the Emin videos I watched, he mentioned how he didn't worry about the kind of attack that someone used against him. Instead, he just worried about angles.
> 
> ...



I think any instructor though with actual fighting experience addresses the same general concept though.  I think this is where the "teacher" and not the "art" comes in.  Example, I watch videos of some of certain Sifu's in my lineage and they can be concerned about this specific attack or that.  Other's (luckily I study from a couple of them) simply say things like "the other hand is coming" and practice entries and methods that cover multiple angles of attack; high, low, middle and that can adapt to whether they are coming inside or outside the guard. 

Not trying to say Emin's ideas aren't good ones, only saying some of his ideas aren't "new" to the WC world sometimes its just a matter of how the idea is expressed.


----------



## KPM (Jan 19, 2017)

yak sao said:


> Emin was my Si-Fu for 10 years. As dynamic as he appears on video, until you've stood across from him.....


 
Emin and....what is the Hungarian's name?....Mantorun...something?  They both look like beasts that I wouldn't want coming after me!


----------



## yak sao (Jan 19, 2017)

KPM said:


> Emin and....what is the Hungarian's name?....Mantorun...something?  They both look like beasts that I wouldn't want coming after me!



I think you nay be referring to Norbert Maday....and I wholeheartedly agree,  
I wouldn't have to worry about fighting either of them, I'd drop dead of a heart attack.


----------



## KPM (Jan 19, 2017)

^^^^^  Yep!  That's him!


----------



## wingchun100 (Jan 20, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> I think any instructor though with actual fighting experience addresses the same general concept though.  I think this is where the "teacher" and not the "art" comes in.  Example, I watch videos of some of certain Sifu's in my lineage and they can be concerned about this specific attack or that.  Other's (luckily I study from a couple of them) simply say things like "the other hand is coming" and practice entries and methods that cover multiple angles of attack; high, low, middle and that can adapt to whether they are coming inside or outside the guard.
> 
> Not trying to say Emin's ideas aren't good ones, only saying some of his ideas aren't "new" to the WC world sometimes its just a matter of how the idea is expressed.


 
Right, and I am not saying he is new either. However, he is new to ME...meaning I never heard it that way until I stumbled across his video.


----------



## anerlich (Jan 22, 2017)

The "deal with the angles" thing is pretty much standard Hoch Hocheim and FMA.

Emin's pretty good. Just don't mention Jon Bluming.


----------



## KPM (Jan 22, 2017)

Ok, I'll bite.  Who is Jon Bluming?


----------



## anerlich (Jan 22, 2017)

KPM said:


> Ok, I'll bite.  Who is Jon Bluming?



Jon Bluming - Wikipedia

What's he got to do with Emin? Left as a (fairly simple) exercise for the reader.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 23, 2017)

anerlich said:


> The "deal with the angles" thing is pretty much standard Hoch Hocheim and FMA.
> 
> Emin's pretty good. Just don't mention Jon Bluming.


===========================
Bluming=quite a fighter


----------



## Juany118 (Jan 23, 2017)

anerlich said:


> Jon Bluming - Wikipedia
> 
> What's he got to do with Emin? Left as a (fairly simple) exercise for the reader.



Now that guy is a beast.  I have two grades of great fighters.  1. The one who could kill me.  2. The one who could kill me, raise me from the dead just to kill me again.  He falls into #2.


----------

