# tae-kwon-do vs wing chun in non-sport combat?



## tifire (Oct 19, 2014)

Tae-Kwon-Do and Wing Chun seem to be the two very popular boards on MT, and I guess they are two of the most popular martial art styles too. They are so different:

Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques.

I know Tae-Kwon-Do is a competition in the Olympics. But which do you think is better for non-sport combat? I would say Wing Chun.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 19, 2014)

Is that because you do wing chun?


----------



## Kwan Sau (Oct 20, 2014)

tifire said:


> They are so different:
> 
> Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
> Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques



Not entirely accurate. Both arts mentioned contain kicks and hand techniques, etc. Perhaps replace 'focuses' with 'may emphasize'(?)  
My WC emphasizes the legs just as much as the hands. Extensive leg and kick training and conditioning, etc. Many years ago I dabbled in TKD and yes, lots of stretching which doesn't appear as much in WC...but I think this is simply because most WC kicking is done at a fairly low level/height. 
Good post though! Thx!


----------



## KPM (Oct 20, 2014)

tifire said:


> Tae-Kwon-Do and Wing Chun seem to be the two very popular boards on MT, and I guess they are two of the most popular martial art styles too. They are so different:
> 
> Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
> Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques.
> ...



Kind of a silly question to ask in a Wing Chun forum.   What answer would you expect to get?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 20, 2014)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the one that's better for self-defense is the one in which you're trained. I, for one, would look pretty silly trying to defend myself with WC techniques.


----------



## mograph (Oct 20, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the one that's better for self-defense is the one in which you're trained.


 That's actually the safe bet. Given the differences between clubs, instructors and students, I'd say that comparing the value of martial art X to martial art Y is a bit of a mug's game. You can't really get anywhere with it. All you can really compare (IMO) is one practitioner to another, at one moment in time, in one context.

Besides, there are practitioners of different arts on this forum: people who've spent years practicing their art. Maybe it's just me, but I think it's polite to respect them all.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Oct 20, 2014)

Wing Chun is the best!

...choice for me. No way I could do some of those kicks in TKD.


----------



## Marnetmar (Oct 20, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the one that's better for self-defense is the one in which you're trained.



.


----------



## yak sao (Oct 20, 2014)

A good TKD fighter is dangerous. However, I would say given what one would expect in a stereotypical self defense scenario, ie. crowded bar, restrictive clothing, slippery shoes.... that WC would tend to play out a little better.

But again, as mentioned by others, it comes down to the individual. I've seen some very good TKD men and some WC people who leave much to be desired.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 20, 2014)

yak sao said:


> A good TKD fighter is dangerous.



A TKD friend of mine always used his "side kick" to kick on brick wall daily as part of his training. His side kick can crash people's rib cage. Another friend of mine like to use "flying side kick" to come down 45 degree from the air and kick on your leading leg knee with all his body weight behind. It's a powerful entering strategy. TKD guy's "back kick" can have surprise effect when you move in and try to knock his head off.

The TKD guys are good in kicking range. The WC guys are good in punching range. It's apple and orange comparsion.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 21, 2014)

Don't know about you guys. But there was a time in australialand TKD was the martial arts of choice for the gangster enforcers, hard men and a feeder into kick boxing. Mostly Turkish/Greek immigrants.

TKD really did have its day were people did it went out to the streets and wrecked peoples stuff with it.

Some TKD is legitimately fight ready.

Jemal hasan springs to mind.

Olympic Taekwondo Centre - Elite Martial Arts Melbourne


----------



## geezer (Oct 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Don't know about you guys. But there was a time in australialand TKD was the martial arts of choice for the gangster enforcers, hard men and a feeder into kick boxing. Mostly Turkish/Greek immigrants.
> 
> TKD really did have its day were people did it went out to the streets and wrecked peoples stuff with it.
> 
> ...



Unfortunately _nowadays_ a TKD is associated with crowds of tiny "tiger-belt" tots and WC is the domain of old men gently playing patty-cake. I know because _I read this on a forum!_


----------



## drop bear (Oct 24, 2014)

geezer said:


> Unfortunately _nowadays_ a TKD is associated with crowds of tiny "tiger-belt" tots and WC is the domain of old men gently playing patty-cake. I know because _I read this on a forum!_



Plenty of martial arts are trained crap. Crap is easier and you get quicker gratification. Nature of the beast. There is some horrific MMA out there.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 23, 2014)

Wing Chun appears to be a bit more practical overall than TKD.

Neither would be my personal choice, but if I had to choose between those two, I would choose WC.


----------



## Tames D (Nov 23, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Wing Chun appears to be a bit more practical overall than TKD.
> 
> Neither would be my personal choice, but if I had to choose between those two, I would choose WC.


What would be your personal choice if you had to train in a TMA?


----------



## geezer (Nov 23, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Wing Chun appears to be a bit more practical overall than TKD.
> 
> Neither would be my personal choice, but if I had to choose between those two, I would choose WC.



That's high praise coming from one of the forums most enthusiastic BJJ proponents. Maybe we can convince you to pick up a bit of WC just for fun in addition to BJJ. --People say they can work well together.


----------



## Hanzou (Nov 23, 2014)

Tames D said:


> What would be your personal choice if you had to train in a TMA?



Capoeria. 

In all seriousness, probably a jujutsu style of some sort.


----------



## Takai (Nov 23, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the one that's better for self-defense is the one in which you're trained.



Succinctly and eloquently put.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 23, 2014)

geezer said:


> That's high praise coming from one of the forums most enthusiastic BJJ proponents. Maybe we can convince you to pick up a bit of WC just for fun in addition to BJJ. --People say they can work well together.



If I had a chance to study with a good teacher, I would love to pick up some Wing Chun. Based on my minimal first-hand exposure and what I've seen on video, I think it would help build certain attributes which would mesh well with my BJJ.

Then again, I never seem to have enough time to master everything I already have to study.


----------



## geezer (Nov 23, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> ...Then again, I never seem to have enough time to master everything I already have to study.



Boy, ain't that the truth!


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 11, 2014)

One of the best street fighters I have ever known was a TKD black belt. I went to a few tournaments of his where he took first place. On the street he didn't use much TKD if any ( kicking ). But he'd knock big dudes out with one or two punches. He was a little Korean guy 5.5" 150lbs. I personally seen him knock out a guy 6.2" 200+ lbs with a overhand right.

I think TKD probably helped him as a fighter. He had power timing and accuracy. Usually those are the things martial arts training  teaches a practitioner if sparring is part of the training. He fought a lot so he had a lot of fight experience. This was back in the 90's. He ended up getting hit in the back of the head with a 40oz bottle and stomped out. He was in a coma but fully recovered and found Jesus. True story!


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 11, 2014)

Martial arts training of any style doesn't magically make you tough or give you heart. So this vs that comparisons in real world confrontations mean nothing. It's more of a practitioner case by case thing. Most people are scared  and think they can talk there way out of a situation. Which ends up allowing the other guy to get the drop on them. Or freeze when they get rocked. Real fighting has the element of fear of death maiming and jail time involved.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 11, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> Martial arts training of any style doesn't magically make you tough or give you heart. So this vs that comparisons in real world confrontations mean nothing. It's more of a practitioner case by case thing. Most people are scared  and think they can talk there way out of a situation. Which ends up allowing the other guy to get the drop on them. Or freeze when they get rocked. Real fighting has the element of fear of death maiming and jail time involved.



I'm forced to disagree. It really depends on what type of training you're receiving. Some arts do train you to be tougher, and smoke arts simply don't.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 11, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I'm forced to disagree. It really depends on what type of training you're receiving. Some arts do train you to be tougher, and smoke arts simply don't.


Gotta agree with it depends on the training you're receiving. But I also believe it isn't the system or style; it is the individual, how the the individual is trained, and how the individual practices what was trained.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 12, 2014)

I think i agree to disagree and then re-agree to disagree with what I agreed with in the first place.....

It is the individual and the training and how it's practiced. Training under pressure and being hit in face helps in the tough dept. Yes not all MA are created equal but sometimes someone just has it. Natural talent, a true fighter spirit and tough as nails to begin with. So even a sport MA like TKD CAN produce good fighters. I have witnessed this first hand. Maybe he got the TKD secret sauce?


----------



## VT_Vectis (Dec 12, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> I think i agree to disagree and then re-agree to disagree with what I agreed with in the first place.....
> 
> It is the individual and the training and how it's practiced. Training under pressure and being hit in face helps in the tough dept. Yes not all MA are created equal but sometimes someone just has it. Natural talent, a true fighter spirit and tough as nails to begin with. So even a sport MA like TKD CAN produce good fighters. I have witnessed this first hand. Maybe he got the TKD secret sauce?



Agreed, friend of mine moved to my local area when we were 17 from a real tough inner city borough; never had any boxing or M.A teaching but grew up scrapping and he has great
timing/distance awareness and was just plain tough. Many the time we got started on and he would give a guy one push to the chest to put them off balance and get the perfect distance then... BAM! He'd either spark them clean out or bloody them so bad they thought twice...

So yeah, individual but also experience counts, whatever the style.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 12, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> I think i agree to disagree and then re-agree to disagree with what I agreed with in the first place.....
> 
> It is the individual and the training and how it's practiced. Training under pressure and being hit in face helps in the tough dept. Yes not all MA are created equal but sometimes someone just has it. Natural talent, a true fighter spirit and tough as nails to begin with. So even a sport MA like TKD CAN produce good fighters. I have witnessed this first hand. Maybe he got the TKD secret sauce?



Okay, but that isn't what you initially said. You said that no martial arts training of any style can make you "magically" a tougher person. I'm saying that you can't get through certain martial art styles without becoming tougher. For example, in Kyokushin, you have to fight through several black belts as a brown to get your black belt. In Bjj we have something called "shark bait" where a white belt has to fight with the entire class in order to get their blue. Stuff like that is going to make you a tougher person.

I would also argue that certain styles attract tougher people.


----------



## Marnetmar (Dec 12, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> For example, in Kyokushin, you have to fight through several black belts as a brown to get your black belt. In Bjj we have something called "shark bait" where a white belt has to fight with the entire class in order to get their blue. Stuff like that is going to make you a tougher person.



This is interesting. It seems like with this kind of training, the art you're training as a whole would become better and better over time.


----------



## Reeksta (Dec 12, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> Martial arts training of any style doesn't magically make you tough or give you heart. So this vs that comparisons in real world confrontations mean nothing. It's more of a practitioner case by case thing. Most people are scared  and think they can talk there way out of a situation. Which ends up allowing the other guy to get the drop on them. Or freeze when they get rocked. Real fighting has the element of fear of death maiming and jail time involved.


I'm also in disagreement with this I'm afraid. If you attended a freestyle or greco-roman wrestling class for six months and weren't a physically tougher and mentally stronger person at the end of it I'd be very surprised


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 12, 2014)

VT_Vectis said:


> Agreed, friend of mine moved to my local area when we were 17 from a real tough inner city borough; never had any boxing or M.A teaching but grew up scrapping and he has great
> timing/distance awareness and was just plain tough. Many the time we got started on and he would give a guy one push to the chest to put them off balance and get the perfect distance then... BAM! He'd either spark them clean out or bloody them so bad they thought twice...
> 
> So yeah, individual but also experience counts, whatever the style.


.  
Yes this is about every tough person I know! Thank you!


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 12, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Okay, but that isn't what you initially said. You said that no martial arts training of any style can make you "magically" a tougher person. I'm saying that you can't get through certain martial art styles without becoming tougher. For example, in Kyokushin, you have to fight through several black belts as a brown to get your black belt. In Bjj we have something called "shark bait" where a white belt has to fight with the entire class in order to get their blue. Stuff like that is going to make you a tougher person.
> 
> I would also argue that certain styles attract tougher people.


Actually what I originally said was tough not tougher. So tougher compared to what? Only spritzing in your underwear instead of completely wetting yourself in a real combat situation? If you think tough is fighting in a controlled environment were someone is there to keep it safe and controlled? Then that's your opinion. My opinion is different. I have seen plenty of Supposedly tough trained people freeze up from fear or from being rocked or out numbered...

I kind of agree with your comment that, some MA arts are more popular to the tougher crowd, and some appeal more to the Harry Potter Dudgeons and Dragons crowd. Still doesn't mean anything. Cause hidden away among the Harry Potters might be a tough MOfo. Same goes with the "tougher" MA's. There might be a few pussys hidden in there ranks too.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 12, 2014)

Just To clarify what I think tough is. Go out to a bar or club with a group of friends. When things go bad and suddenly you are out numbered but those friends still have your back and stand and fight or lay and fight if it's bjj. That's tough or down like we used to say. So many times I can't count. I thought someone was tough and they took off and left me to fight. Mysteriously they were mia out having a smoke or ordering a drink.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 12, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> *So even a sport MA like TKD CAN produce good fighters. I have witnessed this first hand. Maybe he got the TKD secret sauce?[*/QUOTE]
> My opinion take it or leave it! If i wanted to argue. I'd tell my wife her *** is getting big!


----------



## Fog565 (Dec 12, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Then again, I never seem to have enough time to master everything I already have to study.


 Truer words have never been spoken! I respect all martial arts. I believe there is no one art "better" than another. However, some arts are better suited to different scenarios.TKD wouldn't be as effective on the ground as BJJ. Just an example. I have experience in both TKD (not much) and WC. I would have to say WC in a close range scrap for sure. TKD with the power in the kicks and strikes at a longer range. I am not an advocate of flying or high kicks. Don't get me wrong, it takes talent and skill to execute said kicks. But in a real world self defense scenario, its way to easy to get caught off balance if your opponent is sharp. My 2 cents. Rich


----------



## Thunder Foot (Dec 15, 2014)

Distance and timing are lessons we all must learn. Martial Arts or not.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 15, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> So even a sport MA like TKD CAN produce good fighters. I have witnessed this first hand. Maybe he got the TKD secret sauce?



TKD is not a "sport MA". It is a MA. Some schools and some individuals focus on the sport aspects of TKD, but their choice to focus on this subset of TKD does not change what TKD is.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 16, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> TKD is not a "sport MA". It is a MA. Some schools and some individuals focus on the sport aspects of TKD, but their choice to focus on this subset of TKD does not change what TKD is.


You're absolutely right. The "sport" wasn't meant to diminish the combative effectiveness  of the art. But like you said some choose to focus mostly on the sport aspect. So I think the general perception of those looking from the outside in. Is that it's a sport style art. Just like those same people look at Wing Chun as some chi sao slap fest game.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 16, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> Distance and timing are lessons we all must learn. Martial Arts or not.


Exactly! It's not an easy lesson to learn or to perfect for that matter. You learn from doing. In my opinion this means, its a fight and you are going to get hit. Except and embrace it. Next you have to fully commit mentally. I see it time and time again, partial commitment or fear leading too bad things. Which leads back to the first point.


----------



## Mephisto (Dec 16, 2014)

Danny T said:


> Gotta agree with it depends on the training you're receiving. But I also believe it isn't the system or style; it is the individual, how the the individual is trained, and how the individual practices what was trained.


This is a common cliche "individual is more important than style" it's friendly and non threatening so people repeat it ad naseum. The individual is certainly a factor but look at a style as a whole. On average how able is an average practitioner when it comes to fighting? Some styles simply more reliably produce dominant fighters and some style are more occupied by out of shape martial arts fanboys.



Marnetmar said:


> This is interesting. It seems like with this kind of training, the art you're training as a whole would become better and better over time.



Precisely! That's why some arts are able to consistantly put out black belts that can fight and handle a resisting opponent.



Jake104 said:


> I kind of agree with your comment that, some MA arts are more popular to the tougher crowd, and some appeal more to the Harry Potter Dudgeons and Dragons crowd. Still doesn't mean anything. Cause hidden away among the Harry Potters might be a tough MOfo. Same goes with the "tougher" MA's. There might be a few pussys hidden in there ranks too.


Exactly, you can train with the Harry potter fans and if you're deficated become king of the nerds or you can find an art that consistantly produces badasses. There are badasses in every system, but I'd be that tge badasses in the "Harry potter" systems would be badasses no matter what and would even be better with the right system. The problem is, what do those of us who aren't natural badasses do? Go to the art that consistantly makes badasses if that's your goal.



Fog565 said:


> Truer words have never been spoken! I respect all martial arts. I believe there is no one art "better" than another. However, some arts are better suited to different scenarios.TKD wouldn't be as effective on the ground as BJJ. Just an example. I have experience in both TKD (not much) and WC. I would have to say WC in a close range scrap for sure. TKD with the power in the kicks and strikes at a longer range. I am not an advocate of flying or high kicks. Don't get me wrong, it takes talent and skill to execute said kicks. But in a real world self defense scenario, its way to easy to get caught off balance if your opponent is sharp. My 2 cents. Rich


Thanks captain obvious! Tkd won't be as good at grappling? Who'd have thought?


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 16, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> Exactly, you can train with the Harry potter fans and if you're deficated become king of the nerds or you can find an art that consistantly produces badasses. There are badasses in every system, but I'd be that tge badasses in the "Harry potter" systems would be badasses no matter what and would even be better with the right system. The problem is, what do those of us who aren't natural badasses do? Go to the art that consistantly makes badasses if that's your goal.


I think you have dragged me far enough into this pointless argument . Again, I'd rather be kicked in the balls then argue this style is better than that. Bla bla bla bla. You won! Congrats! You picked the better art! Knock yourself out homie! Haha!


----------



## Mephisto (Dec 16, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> I think you have dragged me far enough into this pointless argument . Again, I'd rather be kicked in the balls then argue this style is better than that. Bla bla bla bla. You won! Congrats! You picked the better art! Knock yourself out homie! Haha!


Just my thoughts, not everyone trains to become a fighter or a badass. Many people go their entire life without fighting, I don't have a problem with that. I don't train MMA and I'll admit that many of those guys could kick my ***, there's nothing wrong with that. You can't beat everyone. Give credit where it's due some styles and arts are better at making fighters. One can say MMA is a sport for the ring in an effort to discredit those that don't do what you do or you can admit that some are in fact better and be secure that it's not for you. Surprised no one called me out on my glaring typo (wrote deficate instead of dedicate, haha).


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 16, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> Just my thoughts, not everyone trains to become a fighter or a badass. Many people go their entire life without fighting, I don't have a problem with that. I don't train MMA and I'll admit that many of those guys could kick my ***, there's nothing wrong with that. You can't beat everyone. Give credit where it's due some styles and arts are better at making fighters. One can say MMA is a sport for the ring in an effort to discredit those that don't do what you do or you can admit that some are in fact better and be secure that it's not for you. Surprised no one called me out on my glaring typo (wrote deficate instead of dedicate, haha).


Most people use Martial arts as a seatbelt. They don't wear the seatbelt cause they're planning on ever getting into an accident. It's just incase. Not everyone wants to be the next Jon Jones. Some people are happy with wearing that seatbelt everyday of there life while they drive in the slow Lane. Nothing wrong with that.

No one here in this post is taking away anything from mma. The OP's question was regarding wing chun vs TKD. I do WC which I like to call chinese boxing cause that's how I was originally taught. One of the best street fighters I've known did TKD as his only art. I'm putting a fork in this. Nothing more I want to say about it.


----------



## Jake104 (Dec 16, 2014)

Jake104 said:


> Most people use Martial arts as a seatbelt. They don't wear the seatbelt cause they're planning on ever getting into an accident. It's just incase. Not everyone wants to be the next Jon Jones. Some people are happy with wearing that seatbelt everyday of there life while they drive in the slow Lane. Nothing wrong with that.
> 
> No one here in this post is taking away anything from mma. The OP's question was regarding wing chun vs TKD. I do WC which I like to call chinese boxing cause that's how I was originally taught. One of the best street fighters I've known did TKD as his only art. I'm putting a fork in this. Nothing more I want to say about it.


Don't come back with "well some arts are like a 5 point harness front and side airbags"..lol no seriously I'm done


----------



## Vajramusti (Dec 17, 2014)

tifire said:


> Tae-Kwon-Do and Wing Chun seem to be the two very popular boards on MT, and I guess they are two of the most popular martial art styles too. They are so different:
> 
> Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
> Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques.
> ...





tifire said:


> Tae-Kwon-Do and Wing Chun seem to be the two very popular boards on MT, and I guess they are two of the most popular martial art styles too. They are so different:
> 
> Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
> Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques.
> ...


-------------------------------------

Depends on guts  and the quality of the wing chun that is learned.


----------



## Marnetmar (Dec 18, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> Thanks captain obvious! Tkd won't be as good at grappling? Who'd have thought?



:|


----------



## Danny T (Dec 18, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> This is a common cliche "individual is more important than style" it's friendly and non threatening so people repeat it ad naseum. The individual is certainly a factor but look at a style as a whole. On average how able is an average practitioner when it comes to fighting? Some styles simply more reliably produce dominant fighters and some style are more occupied by out of shape martial arts fanboys.



Marnetmar said: ↑
This is interesting. It seems like with this kind of *training*, the art you're training as a whole would become better and better over time.

Precisely! That's why some arts are able to consistantly put out black belts that can fight and handle a resisting opponent.
[/QUOTE]
Yea, it is how the individual is *trained* and *how they practice*. Boxing is an excellent fighting art but there are many terrible boxers, muay thai is an excellent fighting art but there are many terrible thai boxers. This can be applied to all the arts.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 18, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> This is a common cliche "individual is more important than style" it's friendly and non threatening so people repeat it ad naseum. The individual is certainly a factor but look at a style as a whole. On average how able is an average practitioner when it comes to fighting? Some styles simply more reliably produce dominant fighters and some style are more occupied by out of shape martial arts fanboys.





			
				Marnetmar said:
			
		

> This is interesting. It seems like with this kind of training, the art you're training as a whole would become better and better over time.
> 
> [QUOTE="Mephisto] Precisely! That's why some arts are able to consistantly put out black belts that can fight and handle a resisting opponent.


Yea, If the individual is trained and practices properly they will become a good fighter. Boxing is a excellent fighting art and there are many terrible boxers. Muay Thai is an excellent fighting art and there are many terrible Thai Boxers. Same could be said of any art. There will be some excellent some terrible individuals and everything in-between.


----------



## Buka (Dec 19, 2014)

I hadn't read this thread until today. I don't fancy the this vs that argument. But this thread has some good stuff in it. Made my head hurt thinking about some of it, made me smile, too. I have to read the whole thing again (because I'm too stupid to use the multi quote thingy) and get back to it and chat with you guys.


----------



## ALEX WHITE (Dec 30, 2014)

wing chun is my art, I have versed many tkd practitioners, all but one I have defeated, the one I haven't defeated goes by the name of don, he trains at Toronto's main center for TKD, and has met Grandmaster Kaputo as well is mostly trained by him, I believe it is the practitioner, also considering that he trains to the point of spraining his thumbs (6 times + for each thumb) just to do thumb push ups and conditioning his knuckles until they bleed. he is also trained in 23 or more arts and is extremely dedicated as well as deadly for a 5'4 man, don's also my good school friend


----------



## Mephisto (Dec 30, 2014)

Danny T said:


> Yea, If the individual is trained and practices properly they will become a good fighter. Boxing is a excellent fighting art and there are many terrible boxers. Muay Thai is an excellent fighting art and there are many terrible Thai Boxers. Same could be said of any art. There will be some excellent some terrible individuals and everything in-between.


There's no debate that skill varies among individuals. But looking at systems as a whole using the example of boxing and wc, You'll find a lot more boxers that can apply their craft in a fight or sparring situation. You'll find a lot moe judoka than aikidoka that can grapple and handle resisting opponents. All of the above arts have value but if you want to learn how to defeat resisting opponents and attackers some arts provide more demonstratable evidence of their skill. That's why I say the art is more important than the individual, if you train with resisting opponents regularly you'll be better prepared for reality. If the majority of people in a system can't demonstrate their skill on a resisting partner than that art is not as valuable as one that does. The individual>art argument is a martial arts pop culture saying that shows a lack of insight and is a misguided attempt to be fair and non confrontational.


ALEX WHITE said:


> wing chun is my art, I have versed many tkd practitioners, all but one I have defeated, the one I haven't defeated goes by the name of don, he trains at Toronto's main center for TKD, and has met Grandmaster Kaputo as well is mostly trained by him, I believe it is the practitioner, also considering that he trains to the point of spraining his thumbs (6 times + for each thumb) just to do thumb push ups and conditioning his knuckles until they bleed. he is also trained in 23 or more arts and is extremely dedicated as well as deadly for a 5'4 man, don's also my good school friend



Hiw have you defeated these practitioners? In competition? Who decided you won?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 31, 2014)




----------



## ALEX WHITE (Dec 31, 2014)

Mephisto said:


> There's no debate that skill varies among individuals. But looking at systems as a whole using the example of boxing and wc, You'll find a lot more boxers that can apply their craft in a fight or sparring situation. You'll find a lot moe judoka than aikidoka that can grapple and handle resisting opponents. All of the above arts have value but if you want to learn how to defeat resisting opponents and attackers some arts provide more demonstratable evidence of their skill. That's why I say the art is more important than the individual, if you train with resisting opponents regularly you'll be better prepared for reality. If the majority of people in a system can't demonstrate their skill on a resisting partner than that art is not as valuable as one that does. The individual>art argument is a martial arts pop culture saying that shows a lack of insight and is a misguided attempt to be fair and non confrontational.
> 
> 
> Hiw have you defeated these practitioners? In competition? Who decided you won?




the people I versed were matches between friends and I let my friends who have absolutely know clue about arts decide who won. most of these practitioners have three or four years experience, one is a 4th degree black, who I found quite hard until I closed the gap, but belts mean nothing, considering don declines all of his tests perennially, he would have been black or higher if he din't decline the tests


----------



## Mephisto (Dec 31, 2014)

ALEX WHITE said:


> the people I versed were matches between friends and I let my friends who have absolutely know clue about arts decide who won. most of these practitioners have three or four years experience, one is a 4th degree black, who I found quite hard until I closed the gap, but belts mean nothing, considering don declines all of his tests perennially, he would have been black or higher if he din't decline the tests


Cool, good for you for testing yourself!


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 3, 2015)

Ultimately it depends on the practitioner. But if we will go by the saying that you react by the way you train, taekwondo particularly wtf taekwondo may suffer a bit when it comes to an exchange of techniques with a wing chun guy. WTF practitioners generally practice the sport version of the art. And when it comes to self defense that is very lacking. Unless the wtf guy gets a full on power kick to your head like dwi hooryo chagi or naeryo chagi to your nose... That would be a very unpleasant experience and would often guarantee the end of a fight.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 3, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> There's no debate that skill varies among individuals. But looking at systems as a whole using the example of boxing and wc, You'll find a lot more boxers that can apply their craft in a fight or sparring situation. You'll find a lot moe judoka than aikidoka that can grapple and handle resisting opponents. All of the above arts have value but if you want to learn how to defeat resisting opponents and attackers some arts provide more demonstratable evidence of their skill. That's why I say the art is more important than the individual, if you train with resisting opponents regularly you'll be better prepared for reality. If the majority of people in a system can't demonstrate their skill on a resisting partner than that art is not as valuable as one that does. The individual>art argument is a martial arts pop culture saying that shows a lack of insight and is a misguided attempt to be fair and non confrontational.
> 
> 
> Hiw have you defeated these practitioners? In competition? Who decided you won?


Ummm.. So the art is more important than the artist? Let's use your boxing vs WC example. What if both arts train using the same methods? Like against resisting opponents? Like sparring in all ranges? That's how I train. I don't mind eating shots. I have sparred boxers. So is boxing just better?

Maybe? Maybe not? Depends on who's using it! Same goes for Wing Chun!

PS: Confrontation is my middle name..haha! Check my post history and  with people who know me on here personally. I'm working on being nicer and less confrontational. It's my New Years resolution.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 3, 2015)

" All of the above arts have value but if you want to learn how to defeat resisting opponents and attackers some arts provide more demonstratable evidence of their skill"
----------------------------------------------------
No you just train to defeat resisting opponents. It's just that simple.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 3, 2015)

tkdwarrior said:


> WTF practitioners generally practice the sport version of the art. And when it comes to self defense that is very lacking.



True. Same goes for WC. 
Sadly, not all versions or how they are trained are trained for practical self defense reasons. 
There are a lot of highly commercialized kwoons out there that focus more on the flowery stuff...

I can appreciate your comment as I once had an altercation with a serious practitioner of a kicking art like TKD. His leg skill was impressive and formidable.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 3, 2015)

tkdwarrior said:


> Ultimately it depends on the practitioner. But if we will go by the saying that you react by the way you train, taekwondo particularly wtf taekwondo may suffer a bit when it comes to an exchange of techniques with a wing chun guy. WTF practitioners generally practice the sport version of the art. And when it comes to self defense that is very lacking. Unless the wtf guy gets a full on power kick to your head like dwi hooryo chagi or naeryo chagi to your nose... That would be a very unpleasant experience and would often guarantee the end of a fight.


 
Well, since there IS no such thing as "WTF Taekwondo"....
The WTF is a sports governing organization. They set no curriculum. They award no rank. They sponsor and oversee tournies. That is all.


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 3, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Well, since there IS no such thing as "WTF Taekwondo"....
> The WTF is a sports governing organization. They set no curriculum. They award no rank. They sponsor and oversee tournies. That is all.


You are correct I stand corrected it should be kukki taekwondo.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 3, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> " All of the above arts have value but if you want to learn how to defeat resisting opponents and attackers some arts provide more demonstratable evidence of their skill"
> ----------------------------------------------------
> No you just train to defeat resisting opponents. It's just that simple.



And what do you think a random attacker will be doing on the street?


----------



## ALEX WHITE (Jan 3, 2015)

tkdwarrior said:


> Ultimately it depends on the practitioner. But if we will go by the saying that you react by the way you train, taekwondo particularly wtf taekwondo may suffer a bit when it comes to an exchange of techniques with a wing chun guy. WTF practitioners generally practice the sport version of the art. And when it comes to self defense that is very lacking. Unless the wtf guy gets a full on power kick to your head like dwi hooryo chagi or naeryo chagi to your nose... That would be a very unpleasant experience and would often guarantee the end of a fight.



 your right that Most Wing Chun Fighters train the sport app, but the people I train with all gear their individual styles for self defense situations, I do the same thing as them and I have used wing chun on he street before aswell as the odd times I have been challenged by new people I meet


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 3, 2015)

ALEX WHITE said:


> your right that Most Wing Chun Fighters train the sport app, but the people I train with all gear their individual styles for self defense situations, I do the same thing as them and I have used wing chun on he street before aswell as the odd times I have been challenged by new people I meet


I said that most kukki taekwondo practitioners train more the sport aspect. Wing Chun I am sure is very hard core.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 3, 2015)




----------



## PiedmontChun (Jan 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


>



Interesting video. I was skeptical the first half as they were just circling. That fairly rapid kick (roundhouse I suppose?) took the shirtless guy by surprise and shows the threat that TKD kicks and speed do present in a fight.
However, I notice that at the time he delivered the kick, he was already in a range that WC / WT guys (in my WT school anyway) are generally taught to NOT be in at all. Outside of kick range = relatively safe. Just within kick range = bad place to be and action has to be taken to either close the gap or maintain more space. In my opinion, allowing black shirt guy to get close enough to land kicks from a static position like that would mean a WC/WT guy  would deserve to eat that kick if they don't close the gap.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 5, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> ...at the time he delivered the kick, he was already in a range that WC / WT guys (in my WT school anyway) are generally taught to NOT be in at all. Outside of kick range = relatively safe. Just within kick range = bad place to be and action has to be taken to either close the gap or maintain more space. In my opinion, allowing black shirt guy to get close enough to land kicks from a static position like that would mean a WC/WT guy  would deserve to eat that kick if they don't close the gap.



Hi Piedmont. Your statement IMO is only partially correct. Good Yip Man wing chun can operate at whatever distance is required. As you may know, WC has many 'flavors'...most WC out there only focuses on short bridge. But WC is designed for long and short bridge, depending on the situation. 
Your two choices of "close the gap" or "maintain more space" are certainly two options...however the third option is to employ counter-kicking using WC's straight line concept. In other words: go straight for the target with your nearest weapon to the nearest target. In both of those TKD attacks, he uses a indirect path or trajectory. A common WC saying I've heard is: "use straight to defeat circular".
Just my .02. 
Thanks.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> Hi Piedmont. Your statement IMO is only partially correct. Good Yip Man wing chun can operate at whatever distance is required. As you may know, WC has many 'flavors'...most WC out there only focuses on short bridge. But WC is designed for long and short bridge, depending on the situation.
> Your two choices of "close the gap" or "maintain more space" are certainly two options...however the third option is to employ counter-kicking using WC's straight line concept. In other words: go straight for the target with your nearest weapon to the nearest target. In both of those TKD attacks, he uses a indirect path or trajectory. A common WC saying I've heard is: "use straight to defeat circular".
> Just my .02.
> Thanks.



i must admit the last thing i would do is get into a kick battle with a tkd guy.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> Interesting video. I was skeptical the first half as they were just circling. That fairly rapid kick (roundhouse I suppose?) took the shirtless guy by surprise and shows the threat that TKD kicks and speed do present in a fight.
> However, I notice that at the time he delivered the kick, he was already in a range that WC / WT guys (in my WT school anyway) are generally taught to NOT be in at all. Outside of kick range = relatively safe. Just within kick range = bad place to be and action has to be taken to either close the gap or maintain more space. In my opinion, allowing black shirt guy to get close enough to land kicks from a static position like that would mean a WC/WT guy  would deserve to eat that kick if they don't close the gap.



in that regard yeah. But part of the battle is maintaining your range. So the tactics you have to close the gap competes with his tactic to keep it.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Jan 5, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> Hi Piedmont. Your statement IMO is only partially correct. Good Yip Man wing chun can operate at whatever distance is required. As you may know, WC has many 'flavors'...most WC out there only focuses on short bridge. But WC is designed for long and short bridge, depending on the situation.
> Your two choices of "close the gap" or "maintain more space" are certainly two options...however the third option is to employ counter-kicking using WC's straight line concept. In other words: go straight for the target with your nearest weapon to the nearest target. In both of those TKD attacks, he uses a indirect path or trajectory. A common WC saying I've heard is: "use straight to defeat circular".
> Just my .02.
> Thanks.


Yes, apologies for not being more comprehensive in my statement. It is not simply limited to the two choices I stated, and I certainly was not pointing to any perceived weakness on the part of WC/WT. My school does train various kick defenses but its naive to think these wil always work when a kicker is adept at not telegraphing his kicks.
The kicker's trajectory might be circular in this instance like you mention, but it was fairly rapid and would require an equally rapid and coordinated response to overcome. Basically, if you can't react and get there fast enough, all this "straight versus circular" works only in theory, not practice. I think the shirtless guy put himself in a place I would not be, if I was given a choice at all.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 5, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> Yes, apologies for not being more comprehensive in my statement. It is not simply limited to the two choices I stated, and I certainly was not pointing to any perceived weakness on the part of WC/WT. My school does train various kick defenses but its naive to think these wil always work *when a kicker is adept at not telegraphing his kicks*.
> The kicker's trajectory might be circular in this instance like you mention, but it was fairly rapid and would require an equally rapid and coordinated response to overcome. *Basically, if you can't react and get there fast enough, all this "straight versus circular" works only in theory, not practice.* I think the shirtless guy put himself in a place I would not be, if I was given a choice at all.



Hmmm...interesting response. 
I guess we see different things from that video; and seem to view WC very differently also.
I'm not familiar with WT that you train...but in WC, kicks are not telegraphed. Same as the hands. 
In that video, he was clearly telegraphing his intent IMO. Just watching his body language, his shoulder line, foot placement etc. Anyways, no biggie. Now, your second statement (in bold above) makes me assume you mean it applies to your WT hand skill also(?). In your WT class training...do you guys ever practice WT responses to an attacker who is throwing curved attacks at you (i.e. haymakers? Boxer's hook etc?). If so, it is the same thing upstairs as it is downstairs. That's the point I was trying to make. Thx.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


> i must admit the last thing i would do is get into a kick battle with a tkd guy.



Same here! haha. They have powerful legs. But a 'battle' implies a back and forth struggle. That's not what I was talking about.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> Same here! haha. They have powerful legs. But a 'battle' implies a back and forth struggle. That's not what I was talking about.



well you are engaging him at his point of strength.

tkd guys kick pretty well. They are comfortable with dealing with kicks.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Jan 5, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> Hmmm...interesting response.
> I guess we see different things from that video; and seem to view WC very differently also.
> I'm not familiar with WT that you train...but in WC, kicks are not telegraphed. Same as the hands.
> In that video, he was clearly telegraphing his intent IMO. Just watching his body language, his shoulder line, foot placement etc. Anyways, no biggie. Now, your second statement (in bold above) makes me assume you mean it applies to your WT hand skill also(?). In your WT class training...do you guys ever practice WT responses to an attacker who is throwing curved attacks at you (i.e. haymakers? Boxer's hook etc?). If so, it is the same thing upstairs as it is downstairs. That's the point I was trying to make. Thx.


The kick itself was pretty rapid. I'm just realistically pointing out that while "linear to defeat circular", while true or correct, still requires a fairly rapid response. I could see some low to mid level WC/WT guys eating that kick in the video before they could adequate react, and thats not a criticism of the system, its just being realistic. Reason being is that punching would have required TKD guy to step in, that kick was able to be delivered RIGHT from where he was squared up against shirtless guy. Back to my original statement, I believe its better to just not be in that precise range if you can help it as just a geeneral principle. I would rather make someone work harder to deliver that kick to me, or step in to attack. Who knows what Shirtless guy's training, or lack thereof, is exactly, but his reaction to that kick was essentially nil.
Theres no need to read between the lines of what I was saying and assume things about my training. We (my school) regularly train a powerful centreline attack / response against circular attacks, be they a kick or haymaker type punch. But we are also taught that at certain distance, we need to be striking or not be there at all.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 5, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> And what do you think a random attacker will be doing on the street?


From experience, I'd say 90% of the time a sucker punch will come. The other ten percent may square off with you if you're lucky.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 5, 2015)

Just for the record...
Both of those were crappy kicks.
The roundhouse was delivered to the hip, which is a rotten target, and the position of the hips upon impact ensures that it was a no-power strike.
The spinning kick was half hook kick and half back kick. He did manage to land it on a good target, so it worked, but had it been done properly the other kid would likely have been completely out, not just squatting and saying "that's it, no more".


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 5, 2015)

drop bear said:


>


That guy was real nice. They are or were probably friends. He could of KO'd him bad. He showed restraint and compassion.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 5, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> The kick itself was pretty rapid. I'*m just realistically pointing out that while "linear to defeat circular", while true or correct, still requires a fairly rapid response. I could see some low to mid level WC/WT guys eating that kick in the video before they could adequate react, and thats not a criticism of the system, *its just being realistic. Reason being is that punching would have required TKD guy to step in, that kick was able to be delivered RIGHT from where he was squared up against shirtless guy. Back to my original statement, I believe its better to just not be in that precise range if you can help it as just a geeneral principle. I would rather make someone work harder to deliver that kick to me, or step in to attack. Who knows what Shirtless guy's training, or lack thereof, is exactly, but his reaction to that kick was essentially nil.
> Theres no need to read between the lines of what I was saying and assume things about my training. We (my school) regularly train a powerful centreline attack / response against circular attacks, be they a kick or haymaker type punch. But we are also taught that at certain distance, we need to be striking or not be there at all.



It's just timing your response properly off the kick timing. Pretty basic if you spar. Me personally being a WC guy. I would have stayed a half step out of his kicking range. Let him do his thing and miss then attack. Reason being his kicks weren't the best and he telegraphed a lot. Somebody better id jam in off the kicks timing. Either with an angle in meeting the kick early or angling to the opposite side past the point of full power. Either way jamming in and not allowing it to achieve it's maximum power or intended target. Maybe I eat it maybe I don't. But eating a kick off its original trajectory is way better than eating it on target and at full power. Ask the guy in the video. I bet he agrees!


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 5, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> From experience, I'd say 90% of the time a sucker punch will come. The other ten percent may square off with you if you're lucky.


I was referring to your ridiculous statement that all sparring does is get you better at sparring resisting opponents. People on the street will resist you, if you have experience with resistance training you'll be better prepared. 

Please link a study that proves 90% of the time a sucker punch will come. Your experience differs from mine it's no more valid. I think you've gotten your numbers from the Gracie book of fight statistics "200% of fights go to the ground!". I'd believe a Gracie over you however.


----------



## Buka (Jan 5, 2015)

It really isn't about this style or that, about tactics or anything else. One guy got caught and it sure as hell wrecked his day, the poor bastard. I'll bet it hurt, too. 

I hope he was the bad guy in all that. There's always a bad guy. Sometimes there's two.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

PiedmontChun said:


> The kick itself was pretty rapid. I'm just realistically pointing out that while "linear to defeat circular", while true or correct, still requires a fairly rapid response. I could see some low to mid level WC/WT guys eating that kick in the video before they could adequate react, and thats not a criticism of the system, its just being realistic. Reason being is that punching would have required TKD guy to step in, that kick was able to be delivered RIGHT from where he was squared up against shirtless guy. Back to my original statement, I believe its better to just not be in that precise range if you can help it as just a geeneral principle. I would rather make someone work harder to deliver that kick to me, or step in to attack. Who knows what Shirtless guy's training, or lack thereof, is exactly, but his reaction to that kick was essentially nil.
> Theres no need to read between the lines of what I was saying and assume things about my training. We (my school) regularly train a powerful centreline attack / response against circular attacks, be they a kick or haymaker type punch. But we are also taught that at certain distance, we need to be striking or not be there at all.



that heel kick is a bit tricky to deal with. Yes going forward and countering is the best method. But if your timing is a bit out you eat one of the most dangerous kicks a human being can throw.

and most people don't have the stones.

i certainly don't most of the time and generally go backwards giving up the advantage.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2015)

A very effective use of that kick.

the head hunter.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 5, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I *was referring to your ridiculous statement that all sparring does is get you better at sparring resisting opponents. *People on the street will resist you, if you have experience with resistance training you'll be better prepared.
> 
> Please link a study that proves 90% of the time a sucker punch will come. Your experience differs from mine it's no more valid. I think you've gotten your numbers from the Gracie book of fight statistics "200% of fights go to the ground!". I'd believe a Gracie over you however.


I never said that? What I said was

" Ummm.. So the art is more important than the artist? Let's use your boxing vs WC example. What if both arts train using the same methods? Like against resisting opponents? Like sparring in all ranges? That's how I train. I don't mind eating shots. I have sparred boxers. *So is boxing just better?

Maybe? Maybe not? Depends on who's using it! Same goes for Wing Chun!*


----------



## drop bear (Jan 6, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I never said that? What I said was
> 
> " Ummm.. So the art is more important than the artist? Let's use your boxing vs WC example. What if both arts train using the same methods? Like against resisting opponents? Like sparring in all ranges? That's how I train. I don't mind eating shots. I have sparred boxers. *So is boxing just better?
> 
> Maybe? Maybe not? Depends on who's using it! Same goes for Wing Chun?*



when we compare arts we generally try to imagine an identical person doing both.

Some people will start with more natural ability. But that does not mean the training they do is not affecting them.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I was referring to your ridiculous statement that all sparring does is get you better at sparring resisting opponents. People on the street will resist you, if you have experience with resistance training you'll be better prepared.
> 
> *Please link a study that proves 90% of the time a sucker punch will come. Your experience differs from mine it's no more valid. *I think you've gotten your numbers from the Gracie book of fight statistics "200% of fights go to the ground!". I'd believe a Gracie over you however.





No link sorry! It was an independent study. Only one copy that had to be destroyed for national security reasons.

Don't believe me. I'm just some schmuck on the internet..Believe in yourself!


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 6, 2015)

drop bear said:


> when we compare arts we generally try to imagine an identical person doing both.
> 
> Some people will start with more natural ability. But that does not mean the training they do is not affecting them.


I agreed twice. Now and on your post.Double whammy!


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> I never said that? What I said was
> 
> " Ummm.. So the art is more important than the artist? Let's use your boxing vs WC example. What if both arts train using the same methods? Like against resisting opponents? Like sparring in all ranges? That's how I train. I don't mind eating shots. I have sparred boxers. *So is boxing just better?
> 
> Maybe? Maybe not? Depends on who's using it! Same goes for Wing Chun!*


Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal. It's difficult to find video of two wc guys sparring with a significant degree of resistance. Often when they do it looks less like wc and more like sloppy boxing. Not to mention i think that if wc offered a solid striking foundation we'd see wc practitioners in MMA. I'm not saying there's no good wc anywhere I'm just saying that comparing the average student a boxer will be better prepared for a fight. We are starting to see some examples of wc in MMA but it also seems pretty modified, but I'd like to see more in the future. Wc sounds good in theory, it's a simple direct approach. We just need the wc fighters to get more interested in applying their craft to fighting.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal. It's difficult to find video of two wc guys sparring with a significant degree of resistance. ---------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A problem with making statements like the above- is the assumption "available evidence" is often associated
> with videos and Youtube. Lots of real fights or serious wing chun sparring is not filmed. Old martial arts were and are for self development rather than show. Not taking anything away from boxing specially for the young.
> It is not easy to increase boxing sklls after the age of 30. Also boxing power depends a great deal on people of the same weights. Mayweather is not likely to knock out ex champ Lewis or take a punch from Lewis.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

Self development is a pretty broad term that doesn't guarantee fighting ability. If self development is your goal any art could meet that criteria. I'm referring specifically to the ability to hitting people that don't want to be hit and will also hit you back in a randomized real time fashion. Yes unfortunately YouTube and Internet videos are one primary source of evidence. Video is tangible evidence for something to be scientifically true it must have tangible, measurable, evidence. The fact that a lot if wc sparring goes unfilmed is not evidence. There's also a lot of boxing that goes unfilmed. Part of the reason for boxings success as a fighting style is the sportive component. Competitors train fighters and hobbyists alike. As a hobbyist I train and spar with competitors who have experience and can push me to become better. Wc does not have this benefit, the collective fighting experience of wc and boxers is not equal because there are many more boxers that compete. IMO wc would benefit from competition and a rule set that favors the wc fighter. With enough wc exclusive fighting we may see the development of fighters who can branch out to other martial sports, a side effect of the development of wc as a sport is that non competitive wc enthusiasts can benefit from the knowledge of the fighters. 

Lol at boxers not being able to increase ability after 30. I didn't start boxing until I was 30 and some how I've magically gotten more skilled. I'm sure if you dig you'll find ample evidence of professional boxers improving after age 30. Of course their are weight classes in boxing, there are weight classes in nearly all martial sports. The reality is that when you have two equally skilled fighters, the bigger guy wins. In early UFCs we didn't have weight classes but I'd argue that the smaller guys who beat larger guys were much better than their large opponents. Same for boxing, there are much smaller guys than me who can beat me, but they are better boxers and compete in amateur matches regularly.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Self development is a pretty broad term that doesn't guarantee fighting abilityself development is your goal any art could meet that criteria.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On a wing chun forum, I am interested in wing chun development.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

That doesn't really address any of your other fallacies.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> That doesn't really address any of your other fallacies.


There is plenty of video evidence. Problem is, when WC actually does good then automatically the other guy/ boxer/ Thai boxer/ karate/ whoever sucks. Or the Wing Chun community says, oooohhh where's the WC? Wheres the tan/bong/fuk? Most people have this misconception that WC should look like it's drills. Hate to break it to you but, WC practiced correctly won't look like much. The higher level it's practiced, the more the movements become refined and the less you visually will see.

I have videos of myself sparring full contact against a boxer and another WC guy. I used my WC just like I train it.  I just got sick of hearing, that's not WC, that's not boxing, blah blah blah...... Blah blah....so I took it down. I kind of came to a realization. That first, it's a business, and the phonies actually prefer it to look like a drill driven flowery kind of system. Which gives people a false sense of security. Then they go out and video themselves in a WC guard getting creamed. Second, i have learned To embrace the naysayers like yourself. In the real world I never talk about WC. I just use it. First rule of WC fight club is: you do not talk about WC fight club. Duh!!.. I consider myself a MA'ist first. My main objective is to be a good fighter and protect myself. Wing Chun and Eskrima are the only arts I practice.  The results speak for themselves and keep me training everyday. If boxing does that for you? Then great! I like boxing.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 6, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> There is plenty of video evidence. Problem is, when WC actually does good then automatically the other guy/ boxer/ Thai boxer/ karate/ whoever sucks. Or the Wing Chun community says, oooohhh where's the WC? Wheres the tan/bong/fuk? Most people have this misconception that WC should look like it's drills. Hate to break it to you but, WC practiced correctly won't look like much. The higher level it's practiced, the more the movements become refined and the less you visually will see.
> 
> I have videos of myself sparring full contact against a boxer and another WC guy. I used my WC just like I train it.  I just got sick of hearing, that's not WC, that's not boxing, blah blah blah...... Blah blah....so I took it down. I kind of came to a realization. That first, it's a business, and the phonies actually prefer it to look like a drill driven flowery kind of system. Which gives people a false sense of security. Then they go out and video themselves in a WC guard getting creamed. Second, i have learned To embrace the naysayers like yourself. In the real world I never talk about WC. I just use it. First rule of WC fight club is: you do not talk about WC fight club. Duh!!.. I consider myself a MA'ist first. My main objective is to be a good fighter and protect myself. Wing Chun and Eskrima are the only arts I practice.  The results speak for themselves and keep me training everyday. If boxing does that for you? Then great! I like boxing.


That's great man. You seem to have a realistic outlook, the wc community needs more guys like you. That's a problem I've mentioned here before, the wc community is quick label guys that apply the art more practically as "unauthentic". So it's gotta be pretty disconcerting as a wc guy to have boxers and other strikers and your own community looking down on you. Id think that once you (or anyone? start beating boxers or strikers the striking community will have to embrace wc as a viable striking art. Fight some boxers with an amateur record, than no one can say the boxers aren't any good. I train FMA and boxing myself. I'm critical of wc but I'm not unwilling to admit it's got some potential.


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 6, 2015)

In the end this os just also a comparison of training methodologies. But it is also true whatever style it is the practitioner more than the art.


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 6, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> That's great man. You seem to have a realistic outlook, the wc community needs more guys like you. That's a problem I've mentioned here before, the wc community is quick label guys that apply the art more practically as "unauthentic". So it's gotta be pretty disconcerting as a wc guy to have boxers and other strikers and your own community looking down on you. Id think that once you (or anyone? start beating boxers or strikers the striking community will have to embrace wc as a viable striking art. Fight some boxers with an amateur record, than no one can say the boxers aren't any good. I train FMA and boxing myself. I'm critical of wc but I'm not unwilling to admit it's got some potential.


It's not disconcerting. I could careless. Like I said before when I'm out in the real world around other fighters. I don't carry the Wing Chun torch. It's too heavy! I get along great with boxers and other MA styles. My FMA coach is a boxer at heart. He loves boxing. We can talk for hours on the different approaches each art takes to achieve the same outcome. I embrace the diversity and learn how I can use it to my advantage. I actually prefer trading with other arts more than with WC. That's just me!


----------



## Jake104 (Jan 6, 2015)

tkdwarrior said:


> In the end this os just also a comparison of training methodologies. But it is also true whatever style it is the practitioner more than the art.


Oh no! Don't get him ( Mephisto ) started on the practitioner vs the art debate again!  haha!


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 7, 2015)

This is an interesting debate. As someone who fairly recently began wing chun after doing a lot of research on it, I think @Mephisto makes some valid points. My take on it is that the principles and techniques behind WC are brilliant - ideal for realistic self defence - but many practitioners suffer from a lack of aliveness in their training. I look at the students at my school and there's some who are fantastically skilled, but when I think of the kind of intensity the monsters at my wrestling club or my old judo buddies bring to the table, I simply can't imagine them coping with it. Some of us have an attitude more in line with @Jake104 and like to get a bit more rough with each other but we're the minority tbh.
Worth pointing out that similar problems exist within most systems. I have a friend who's a really good purple belt in BJJ. He medals in comps regularly and taps me out with the quickness if we roll pure grappling. If we introduce striking on the ground (even really light slaps) though he can't cope at all. All his fancy guard variations go out the window and he starts flapping his arms around like he's being attacked by a swarm of bees. Similarly, another mate of mine is a JKD practitioner with really good kickboxing but he's bought into the idea that 'grappling is just for sport' (which I think is BS personally) and is thus really easy to take down and completely helpless off his back. I guess what I'm saying - and what the common theme of this thread seems to be - is that it's important to be objective about what and how we train, so that we can identify our weaknesses and look to rectify them.


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 7, 2015)

Jake104 said:


> Oh no! Don't get him ( Mephisto ) started on the practitioner vs the art debate again!  haha!


Excuse me?


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 7, 2015)

tkdwarrior said:


> Excuse me?





tkdwarrior said:


> In the end this os just also a comparison of training methodologies. But it is also true whatever style it is the practitioner more than the art.



I've been hammering the point that the individual>style is not a fact, it's up for debate and I'd say it's simply not true. If you want to learn how to handle realistic and resisting opponents some systems are better. Yes, there will always be good and bad fighters in any system but if you look at the average practitioner's ability to handle a resisting opponent in a specific system you'll get an idea of how effective said system is for fighting resisting opponents. The individual trumps style argument is untrue and very debatable but people keep repeating it as if it were a fact.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 7, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> That doesn't really address any of your other fallacies.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fallacies? The thread is full of them. FWIW I am way past debating . Interested in discussing wing chun in a wing chun forum.


----------



## tkdwarrior (Jan 7, 2015)

Is that so?


----------



## geezer (Jan 7, 2015)

Personally, I'd also disagree with Mephisto's earlier statement, _"Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal."_ But then he went on to make some excellent points.

In a subsequent post he stated, _"the collective fighting experience of wc and boxers is not equal because there are many more boxers that compete. IMO wc would benefit from competition and a rule set that favors the wc fighter. With enough wc exclusive fighting we may see the development of fighters who can branch out to other martial sports, a side effect of the development of wc as a sport is that non competitive wc enthusiasts can benefit from the knowledge of the fighters."_

I'll be 60 this coming summer so I'm getting past the age where I personally can spar hard (including grappling) without constantly sustaining injuries, but I _do_ believe that having more sparring and competition in general could benefit WC. Not only would it raise the standard of those of us who practice WC, it would also  attract more athletic and competitive individuals to the art.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 7, 2015)

geezer said:


> Personally, I'd also disagree with Mephisto's earlier statement, _"Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal."_ But then he went on to make some excellent points.
> 
> In a subsequent post he stated, _"the collective fighting experience of wc and boxers is not equal because there are many more boxers that compete. IMO wc would benefit from competition and a rule set that favors the wc fighter. With enough wc exclusive fighting we may see the development of fighters who can branch out to other martial sports, a side effect of the development of wc as a sport is that non competitive wc enthusiasts can benefit from the knowledge of the fighters."_
> 
> I'll be 60 this coming summer so I'm getting past the age where I personally can spar hard (including grappling) without constantly sustaining injuries, but I _do_ believe that having more sparring and competition in general could benefit WC. Not only would it raise the standard of those of us who practice WC, it would also  attract more athletic and competitive individuals to the art.


The number reason, in my opinion, that many wc people are not doing any real resistance training. Forms and pre set drills are good for learning to a point. There are a lot of Great WC Drillers out there. I have my WCers doing a lot of freestyle pad work with the pad holder punching and kicking the puncher. Then we Spar, Spar, Spar. Against WCers, against our Muay Thai guys, against our CSW guys. My sifu who trained under Jiu Wan in Hong Kong fought, a lot. And he had us spar, a lot. 

A lot of karate programs with point fighting only training and competition have the same problem vs boxers, muay thai, or whatever. It is about the training, the practice, the pressure testing against someone who is not being compliant to you.
And guess what, you will get hit, you will get kicked, but you will become a much better wc practitioner for it.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 7, 2015)

geezer said:


> Personally, I'd also disagree with Mephisto's earlier statement, _"Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal."_ But then he went on to make some excellent points.
> 
> In a subsequent post he stated, _"the collective fighting experience of wc and boxers is not equal because there are many more boxers that compete. IMO wc would benefit from competition and a rule set that favors the wc fighter. With enough wc exclusive fighting we may see the development of fighters who can branch out to other martial sports, a side effect of the development of wc as a sport is that non competitive wc enthusiasts can benefit from the knowledge of the fighters."_
> 
> I'll be 60 this coming summer so I'm getting past the age where I personally can spar hard (including grappling) without constantly sustaining injuries, but I _do_ believe that having more sparring and competition in general could benefit WC. Not only would it raise the standard of those of us who practice WC, it would also  attract more athletic and competitive individuals to the art.


I'm glad you can see what I'm getting at even if you don't 100% with my viewpoint. I'm not trying to troll and I really am open minded. I've just put a lot of thought and consideration into my  stance on martial arts. I'm sure there are exceptional wc fighters out there, it seems quite a few wc guys I meet agree that there are a lot of wc guys that don't spar or apply the forms and drills to a resisting opponent. I've run into some wc guys here who don't seem to appreciate the value of sparring and resistance training. In the minds of some people sparring has no value in the street, this is the mentality that cripples some potentially great fighting systems. Not everyone in a system has to fight but the system should have a solid core of fighters to set a precedent and share experience.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 7, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> I have a friend who's a really good purple belt in BJJ. He medals in comps regularly and taps me out with the quickness if we roll pure grappling. If we introduce striking on the ground (even really light slaps) though he can't cope at all. All his fancy guard variations go out the window and he starts flapping his arms around like he's being attacked by a swarm of bees.



The sad thing about this is that it isn't that hard to master the fundamentals of punch defense and combative application on the ground. If your friend spent even 1/10th of the time practicing those as he does his tournament moves, he'd be fine against anyone but a skilled ground-n-pounder.



Reeksta said:


> it's important to be objective about what and how we train, so that we can identify our weaknesses and look to rectify them.



Exactly. Too many people get their egos tied up in defending their training choices by pointing out everything they see as a weakness in other styles. If they spent that same energy addressing the weaknesses that others can see in them, they'd be a lot better off.


----------



## Reeksta (Jan 7, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> The sad thing about this is that it isn't that hard to master the fundamentals of punch defense and combative application on the ground. If your friend spent even 1/10th of the time practicing those as he does his tournament moves, he'd be fine against anyone but a skilled ground-n-pounder.


Your statement is absolutely spot-on but, simply to assuage my own guilt at possibly misrepresenting him, I feel I should point out that this lad is very open about the fact that BJJ is just a fun hobby for him. He doesn't equate it to self defence and is the last person who'd paint himself as any sort of badass. You're right though, if he devoted even a little time to the more martial aspects of the art he definitely could be because the kid is incredibly talented


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 7, 2015)

Reeksta said:


> Your statement is absolutely spot-on but, simply to assuage my own guilt at possibly misrepresenting him, I feel I should point out that this lad is very open about the fact that BJJ is just a fun hobby for him. He doesn't equate it to self defence and is the last person who'd paint himself as any sort of badass. You're right though, if he devoted even a little time to the more martial aspects of the art he definitely could be because the kid is incredibly talented


Yeah, if someone only wants to do BJJ as a sport and doesn't care about the combative aspects, then that's their right. I just figured that if he was willing to play around with you striking that he must have at least a little interest in the martial side of the art.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Jan 29, 2015)

tifire said:


> Tae-Kwon-Do and Wing Chun seem to be the two very popular boards on MT, and I guess they are two of the most popular martial art styles too. They are so different:
> 
> Tae-Kwon-Do is a Korean martial art. It focuses on kicks and flexibility.
> Wing Chun is a Chinese martial art. It focuses on hand techniques.
> ...


Tae-Kwon-Do is primarily a sport art. Most clubs within this art do not allow contact. They are designed to get points and position. That is not to say some techniques are very effective/powerful in real combat situations. Yet, where TKD falls down a bit is distancing. Fights rarely allow space. The fight involves clinchwork, close quarter striking and heavy contact. Wing chun specialises in this area and therefore is more likely to pull off a victory, but it really always comes down to the practitioner over style


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 29, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Just for the record...
> Both of those were crappy kicks.
> The roundhouse was delivered to the hip, which is a rotten target, and the position of the hips upon impact ensures that it was a no-power strike.
> The spinning kick was half hook kick and half back kick. He did manage to land it on a good target, so it worked, but had it been done properly the other kid would likely have been completely out, not just squatting and saying "that's it, no more".


 
Zero Penetration whatsoever


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 29, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Judging from the available evidence is say boxing is just better if fighting ability is your goal. It's difficult to find video of two wc guys sparring with a significant degree of resistance. Often when they do it looks less like wc and more like sloppy boxing. Not to mention i think that if wc offered a solid striking foundation we'd see wc practitioners in MMA. I'm not saying there's no good wc anywhere I'm just saying that comparing the average student a boxer will be better prepared for a fight. We are starting to see some examples of wc in MMA but it also seems pretty modified, but I'd like to see more in the future. Wc sounds good in theory, it's a simple direct approach. We just need the wc fighters to get more interested in applying their craft to fighting.



The "we'd see it in MMA" argument is crap. People say that about TKD, but its everywhere in MMA. Silva, Henderson, Pettis, all use TKD Tech kicks. Fights have been won with Cresecnt Kicks. Not to mention, for like 10 years now people who only want to step in the cage will tend to only learn bare bones because its faster. Thats why there so much brawling and so little technique. So many fighters only having kickboxing and some BJJ or wrestling. Simplest isnt always better. Many times fighters will have openings for an omoplata on the mat because they cant get the armbar, or could easily mix a high kick to the head on an opponent who drops his guard or start to close his eyes when a flurry of punches come. But they dont, because theyve limited theyre background. Obviously this isnt standard, but it happens in MMA gyms all the time. That doesnt make Style X ineffective. MMA fighters dont just decide to take a TMA for the cage, theyre existing TMA's who want to get in the cage.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 29, 2015)

KamonGuy2 said:


> Tae-Kwon-Do is primarily a sport art.



Completely incorrect. Taekwondo Is a Martial Art. There are SOME schools that are primarily focused on Olympic-style sparring. Taekwondo, however, is not.



KamonGuy2 said:


> Most clubs within this art do not allow contact.



Completely incorrect. I have never personally been in a dojang that didn't spar with contact. Some (ITF) encourage a lower level of contact, but contact is nonetheless required. And at high levels of ITF competition, the contact is definitely higher. Most spar with a fairly high level of contact. Those sport oriented schools that you seem to think are indicative of the entire art spar full contact. A knockout is a win.
I have no doubt that there are some schools that spar no contact. But they are very much a minority.



KamonGuy2 said:


> They are designed to get points and position.



Completely incorrect. You're really on a roll here.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you've never been kicked by a good TKD practitioner.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 29, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> The "we'd see it in MMA" argument is crap. People say that about TKD, but its everywhere in MMA. Silva, Henderson, Pettis, all use TKD Tech kicks. Fights have been won with Cresecnt Kicks. Not to mention, for like 10 years now people who only want to step in the cage will tend to only learn bare bones because its faster. Thats why there so much brawling and so little technique. So many fighters only having kickboxing and some BJJ or wrestling. Simplest isnt always better. Many times fighters will have openings for an omoplata on the mat because they cant get the armbar, or could easily mix a high kick to the head on an opponent who drops his guard or start to close his eyes when a flurry of punches come. But they dont, because theyve limited theyre background. Obviously this isnt standard, but it happens in MMA gyms all the time. That doesnt make Style X ineffective. MMA fighters dont just decide to take a TMA for the cage, theyre existing TMA's who want to get in the cage.



That logic isn't really sound. MMA is pretty heavy on technique. There are high level tkders who do it and there is no shortage of head kicks.


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 29, 2015)

drop bear said:


> That logic isn't really sound. MMA is pretty heavy on technique. There are high level tkders who do it and there is no shortage of head kicks.



Theres a lot of brawling in the UFC of late, the technique happens on the mat. Also, theres definitely a lack of head kicks, of kicks in general. The only real kicking I've seen for a while is from people from kicking backgrounds (henderson, cerrone, etc.) who trained there before fighting in the UFC. There might be one or two leg kicks here or there, but that tends to be it. When it comes to striking, brawling is taking over the UFC. The high level TKD guys, were already high level TKD guys before their MMA training. They didnt Train in MMA then decide to do TKD. I've never heard of that, it's always the opposite. They may train with people from other arts for input, but they arent training in that art. As more and more people who want to get in the train only pick up Kickboxing/BJJ or wrestling, the diversity dies and fighters become more limited.


----------



## Mephisto (Jan 30, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> The "we'd see it in MMA" argument is crap. People say that about TKD, but its everywhere in MMA. Silva, Henderson, Pettis, all use TKD Tech kicks. Fights have been won with Cresecnt Kicks. Not to mention, for like 10 years now people who only want to step in the cage will tend to only learn bare bones because its faster. Thats why there so much brawling and so little technique. So many fighters only having kickboxing and some BJJ or wrestling. Simplest isnt always better. Many times fighters will have openings for an omoplata on the mat because they cant get the armbar, or could easily mix a high kick to the head on an opponent who drops his guard or start to close his eyes when a flurry of punches come. But they dont, because theyve limited theyre background. Obviously this isnt standard, but it happens in MMA gyms all the time. That doesnt make Style X ineffective. MMA fighters dont just decide to take a TMA for the cage, theyre existing TMA's who want to get in the cage.


I don't know who says we don't see tkd in MMA surely not me. That doesn't take away from the fact that WC is uncommon in mma. wc is such a specialized art, the trapping range is a transitional range and is not a necessary range to master, but trained properly it can likely provide a good advantage.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 30, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Not to mention, for like 10 years now people who only want to step in the cage will tend to only learn bare bones because its faster. Thats why there so much brawling and so little technique.





Drose427 said:


> Theres a lot of brawling in the UFC of late, the technique happens on the mat.



I'll have to disagree. From what I've seen, the level of technique in the UFC and in MMA in general has been constantly improving since the beginning. The technique may not always look the same as it would in boxing or TKD or wrestling or Muay Thai or BJJ, because the demands of the sport are different, but it is absolutely there.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 30, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I don't know who says we don't see tkd in MMA surely not me. That doesn't take away from the fact that WC is uncommon in mma. wc is such a specialized art, the trapping range is a transitional range and is not a necessary range to master, but trained properly it can likely provide a good advantage.



You see a lot of the concepts. The reason you don't see wing chun in mma is if you change one tiny part it is not wing chun anymore.

And you are not going to see wing chun in its entirety used successfully in mma.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 30, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Theres a lot of brawling in the UFC of late, the technique happens on the mat. Also, theres definitely a lack of head kicks, of kicks in general. The only real kicking I've seen for a while is from people from kicking backgrounds (henderson, cerrone, etc.) who trained there before fighting in the UFC. There might be one or two leg kicks here or there, but that tends to be it. When it comes to striking, brawling is taking over the UFC. The high level TKD guys, were already high level TKD guys before their MMA training. They didnt Train in MMA then decide to do TKD. I've never heard of that, it's always the opposite. They may train with people from other arts for input, but they arent training in that art. As more and more people who want to get in the train only pick up Kickboxing/BJJ or wrestling, the diversity dies and fighters become more limited.



You are kind of shooting tkd in the foot there by suggesting brawling is more effective than tkd though.

I mean if they are brawling,not throwing kicks and leaving tkd for kickboxing. That in itself would say something about tkd.


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> You are kind of shooting tkd in the foot there by suggesting brawling is more effective than tkd though.
> 
> I mean if they are brawling,not throwing kicks and leaving tkd for kickboxing. That in itself would say something about tkd.



The TKD guys arent leaving TKD. My point was, folks who only want to step in the cage tend to not study TMAs while going to their gym. They didnt give TMAs a shot because they dont see a point in dedicating themselves to a style and putting in years learning new material when theyre already getting what they need elsewhere. TKD is used in the cage all the time by folks who started there and wanted to use it in the cage. My entire point was just because something isnt in the cage, doesnt make it ineffective. I never suggested brawling was more effective, those were your words and not mine.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 30, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> The TKD guys arent leaving TKD. My point was, folks who only want to step in the cage tend to not study TMAs while going to their gym. They didnt give TMAs a shot because they dont see a point in dedicating themselves to a style and putting in years learning new material when theyre already getting what they need elsewhere. TKD is used in the cage all the time by folks who started there and wanted to use it in the cage. My entire point was just because something isnt in the cage, doesnt make it ineffective. I never suggested brawling was more effective, those were your words and not mine.



well if they are brawling in mma and not doing tkd.  It is because brawling drops guys where tkd does not. Or they would be doing tkd.

I mean this idea that a system takes a bit to learn but when you know it you will clean house with it. Doesn't really work. Because it would take one person to know it, start beating people up and suddenly everybody would be putting in the time to learn it.

eg. Ronda rousey and judo.


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> well if they are brawling in mma and not doing tkd.  It is because brawling drops guys where tkd does not. Or they would be doing tkd.
> 
> I mean this idea that a system takes a bit to learn but when you know it you will clean house with it. Doesn't really work. Because it would take one person to know it, start beating people up and suddenly everybody would be putting in the time to learn it.
> 
> eg. Ronda rousey and judo.



Really? Because Silva, Pettis, Henderson, Cung Le, Dennis Siver, David Loiseau,  all use and used TKD very effectively. Cung Le was a renowned kicker,  many times throwing more kicks than punches. His record was 16-4 before he retired and he broke rich Franklins arm with TKD and people didnt swarm to learn it. Silva usesTKD kicks all the time, most notable his high round houses and front kick. People still aren't swarming to learn a new style. All of these fighters started beating people by using TKD blended with boxing and their respective grappling style. The idea that everyone will do it because it works isnt completely accurate. There are a lot of fighters who use wrestling over BJJ.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 30, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> Really? Because Silva, Pettis, Henderson, Cung Le, Dennis Siver, David Loiseau,  all use and used TKD very effectively. Cung Le was a renowned kicker,  many times throwing more kicks than punches. His record was 16-4 before he retired and he broke rich Franklins arm with TKD and people didnt swarm to learn it. Silva usesTKD kicks all the time, most notable his high round houses and front kick. People still aren't swarming to learn a new style. All of these fighters started beating people by using TKD blended with boxing and their respective grappling style. The idea that everyone will do it because it works isnt completely accurate. There are a lot of fighters who use wrestling over BJJ.



So there is tkd, high kicks and technical martial artists in mma?


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> So there is tkd, high kicks and technical martial artists in mma?



In some  of the older fighters, fewer and fewer new fighters are coming from TMA's.


----------

