# Do you modify your Wing Chun when sparring?



## geezer (Jan 14, 2019)

When you spar, especially if you spar against other styles, do you adjust or modify your guard and techniques or do you work from the classical back-weighted stance, facing your opponent squarely with hands held in a man-wu-sau position extending out from center-line? 

And how do you move? Are you constantly moving and evasive or do you try to find or create an opening and explode straight forward?


----------



## ShortBridge (Jan 14, 2019)

My view is this: Sparring is a drill. It's training. 

So, if the purpose of me sparring has to do with my Wing Chun, then modifying it would be counter-productive. 

If my goal for sparring with something different (conditioning, competition, getting tougher, learning about another style or approach...) then maybe.Usually when I'm working with someone out of my club who wants to spar, it flows into a discussion about rules and usually those rules start to chip away at what my normal approach to Wing Chun is, like kicks below the waist. 

But many people on this forum and in the real world equate sparring with "reality", so I wanted to clarify that that is not what I mean by my answer.


----------



## Martial D (Jan 14, 2019)

geezer said:


> When you spar, especially if you spar against other styles, do you adjust or modify your guard and techniques or do you work from the classical back-weighted stance, facing your opponent squarely with hands held in a man-wu-sau position extending out from center-line?
> 
> And how do you move? Are you constantly moving and evasive or do you try to find or create an opening and explode straight forward?



If you've read many of my posts, you know my answer already. Yes, heavilly modified.

Always moving, equally weighted stance, back heel lifted, boxing footwork and head movement.  The wingchun is always searching for the outside gate and stuffing guard/strikes with one hand while striking with the other while upright in the pocket.(or from either end of the bjj guard position)


----------



## Danny T (Jan 14, 2019)

My opinion is wing chun or any training system is to be utilized as required at any particular time.
The so called WC guard isn't a guard but a position to be used when needed. To stand with the arms out in front when not engaged I feel is foolish. Moving into the mon sao guard as one enters or intercepts the opponent's movement is a far better than standing with a mon sao vs most of what one will encounter. Ever spar empty hand vs knife? Great way to get cut. In order to be a good wc person one must be able to adjust and adapt as needed.


----------



## geezer (Jan 15, 2019)

Danny T said:


> My opinion is wing chun or any training system is to be utilized as required at any particular time ...The so called WC guard isn't a guard but _a position to be used when needed_. To stand with the arms out in front when not engaged I feel is foolish...



 This is how I look at it. Context is everything.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 15, 2019)

Geezer,
I would go as far as to say;
those who adhere to strict adherence to a particular action or structure do not understand the wing chun system and do not understand the realities of physical conflict...(fighting). Mon Sao or any specific arm/hand structure is like stances. Snapshots in time.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 15, 2019)

Danny T said:


> To stand with the arms out in front when not engaged I feel is foolish.


I won't call the following posture "foolish".

When you put your arms in your opponent's striking path, you have already eliminated your opponent's straight line punch ability. All his straight line punch will have to meet your hands first. You just force your opponent to punch around your arms.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 15, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I won't call the following posture "foolish".
> 
> When you put your arms in your opponent's striking path, you have already eliminated your opponent's straight line punch ability. All his straight line punch will have to meet your hands first. You just force your opponent to punch around your arms.


I can only assume you missed the referencing of the so called wc guard (mon sao). The arms in the mon sao is the anatomical upper limb of the human body. What you are referencing in your example are completely different arms.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 17, 2019)

I’ve said many times that what is important first is the principles, and then the techniques.  Training is developing the principles, often through the medium of the techniques.  But that is an idealized scenario, useful in training because it emphasizes the principles.

The chaos of combat typically does not allow the idealized or “perfect” use of the techniques or the postures.  So you adapt to the reality presented to you.  What you look like in combat may be very different from what you look like in training.  But if the principles are engaged then you are still using your training.  It is still wing chun, or whatever your system is.

People like to say that you will fight how you train.  I agree.  But that does not mean that you need to look the same in a fight as what you look like in training.


----------



## KPM (Jan 18, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I’ve said many times that what is important first is the principles, and then the techniques.  Training is developing the principles, often through the medium of the techniques.  But that is an idealized scenario, useful in training because it emphasizes the principles.
> 
> The chaos of combat typically does not allow the idealized or “perfect” use of the techniques or the postures.  So you adapt to the reality presented to you.  What you look like in combat may be very different from what you look like in training.  But if the principles are engaged then you are still using your training.  It is still wing chun, or whatever your system is.
> 
> People like to say that you will fight how you train.  I agree.  But that does not mean that you need to look the same in a fight as what you look like in training.



I would tend to agree with you to a certain extent and for specific arts.  However, many "traditional" martial arts teach a very specific biomechanics....or way of moving....that is heavily emphasized in their forms and drills.   What makes that martial art specifically THAT martial art is both the principles AND those specific biomechanics.  So if you abandon those biomechanics in an actual fight, can you still be said to be doing that specific marital art?   And if you are using those biomechanics in a fight, wouldn't you look like you know that martial art?   A  western boxer does not spend all that time learning to generate good punching power with good biomechanics in the gym and then abandon that when he gets in the ring. 

The part I agree with is that combat is indeed chaos and doesn't always allow for idealized or perfect techniques and  biomechanics. However, as many of you know, my pet peeve is the people that spend years or decades learning a traditional martial art and then step into a sparring arena and look like sloppy kickboxing.   Using the "chaos of combat" and "what we do is principle based" arguments are just a cope out for not really knowing how to use the martial art they study, or for studying a martial that really doesn't work in that kind of situation but not admitting that.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 18, 2019)

Haven’t got as far sparring in Wing Chun as yet, but as the system I study is modified, would it not all be exactly as the theme of the thread suggests, all open to personal, or system interpretation?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 18, 2019)

KPM said:


> I would tend to agree with you to a certain extent and for specific arts.  However, many "traditional" martial arts teach a very specific biomechanics....or way of moving....that is heavily emphasized in their forms and drills.   What makes that martial art specifically THAT martial art is both the principles AND those specific biomechanics.  So if you abandon those biomechanics in an actual fight, can you still be said to be doing that specific marital art?   And if you are using those biomechanics in a fight, wouldn't you look like you know that martial art?   A  western boxer does not spend all that time learning to generate good punching power with good biomechanics in the gym and then abandon that when he gets in the ring.
> 
> The part I agree with is that combat is indeed chaos and doesn't always allow for idealized or perfect techniques and  biomechanics. However, as many of you know, my pet peeve is the people that spend years or decades learning a traditional martial art and then step into a sparring arena and look like sloppy kickboxing.   Using the "chaos of combat" and "what we do is principle based" arguments are just a cope out for not really knowing how to use the martial art they study, or for studying a martial that really doesn't work in that kind of situation but not admitting that.


In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson.  That is what gives a system its particular look.  The biomechanics are based on the principles.  If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.

I don’t personally understand why it would matter if someone looks like they trained in a particular method.  To me, that would be irrelevant.  I don’t care at all if someone could guess what method I trained simply by watching me destroy a couple thugs.


----------



## KPM (Jan 18, 2019)

*In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson.  That is what gives a system its particular look.  The biomechanics are based on the principles.  If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.*

---Again, only to a certain extent and only with particular systems.   But if someone is training Wing Chun and pivoting on the heels to angle and generate power, and training the "step slide" or "drag step" for punching....and then starts swinging from the hips and pivoting on the ball of one foot like a boxer when sparring....and yet say they are still using "Wing Chun" principles.....they are not using biomechanics based upon Wing Chun principles.  I would not say that the biomechanics taught in the Wing Chun forms and drills are exaggerated.  They are a very specific thing, and if someone is not using those biomechanics in application, then can they be said to still be doing Wing Chun?

*I don’t personally understand why it would matter if someone looks like they trained in a particular method.  To me, that would be irrelevant.  I don’t care at all if someone could guess what method I trained simply by watching me destroy a couple thugs.*

---I agree!  But we have had a fair number of people showing sparring/fighting videos with a clear influence from western boxing/kickboxing without giving acknowledgement or credit to that fact ....claiming they are doing "pure Wing Chun"....or "applied Wing Chun" or some such non-sense.  I just think people should be honest with themselves and others and admit when they are departing from their system or style.

---And really, the bottom-line here is that when the **** hits the fan and you are under pressure and stress....if you have abandoned the majority of your traditional training to the point that it is no longer recognizable, then what is the point of spending all that time training it?  Your time is better spent training a system that is going to hold up under stress and actually function in a real fight.


----------



## ShortBridge (Jan 18, 2019)

KPM said:


> *...*
> ---And really, the bottom-line here is that when the **** hits the fan and you are under pressure and stress....if you have abandoned the majority of your traditional training to the point that it is no longer recognizable, then what is the point of spending all that time training it?  Your time is better spent training a system that is going to hold up under stress and actually function in a real fight.



Here's the thing and I don't expect us to ever align on it as a community - There's a big difference between sparring and the **** hitting the fan. I've a decent amount of experience with both, as much as we seem to want them to be the same thing this decade, they are not.

If I (or one of my students at this point) enters a tournament then I would coach and encourage him to try to win. It's a game, it's a sport, figure it out and compete. That's why you do those things. Doing so may or may not conform to our normal training, it depends on the tournament.

If I set up sparring with someone from outside of our club, then I would have a reason and a purpose. Assuming that purpose was to test their training and bring lessons home that we can work from, then they need to go in with what they train. If they train in Wing Chun for 10 years and then go try to box, we learn nothing. We learn that they are not a good boxer. I can teach them that without ever leaving our kwoon. Sparring for a purpose is not necessarily about winning it's about training. Every drill...and sparring is a drill...should have a purpose. If the purpose is becoming better at your system, then you can't abandon your system for sparring and still accomplish that. You can't put on gloves in your backyard once and prove that your system is good or bad. Boxers and kickboxers spar all of the time and no single session defines them and there are never winners and losers. They might be conditioning, working on slipping or footwork or any number of other things. If you don't know what they are working on, you can't watch a minute of it and know if they were successful or not. They understand that...we seem not to.

Being assaulted in your home or on the street is a different matter entirely. I dream of a day when we can discuss martial arts without equating the two things...but I also know better.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 18, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Geezer,
> I would go as far as to say;
> those who adhere to strict adherence to a particular action or structure do not understand the wing chun system and do not understand the realities of physical conflict...(fighting). Mon Sao or any specific arm/hand structure is like stances. Snapshots in time.


I tend to believe this of all systems. I obviously haven't experienced all of them, but this belief has never let me down.


----------



## KPM (Jan 18, 2019)

ShortBridge said:


> Here's the thing and I don't expect us to ever align on it as a community - There's a big difference between sparring and the **** hitting the fan. I've a decent amount of experience with both, as much as we seem to want them to be the same thing this decade, they are not.
> 
> If I (or one of my students at this point) enters a tournament then I would coach and encourage him to try to win. It's a game, it's a sport, figure it out and compete. That's why you do those things. Doing so may or may not conform to our normal training, it depends on the tournament.
> 
> ...



Sure!  Sparring can be seen as training, or sparring can be seen as competition.  There can be two very different approaches to sparring based upon which attitude you take. THAT is the dichotomy that is hard for people to come to grips with!  However, I see a less distinct dichotomy between sparring as competition to be won and when the "**** hits the  fan."   Fighting is fighting.  If someone accosts you on the street it may be very close quarters and a "self defense" situation, but the minute you have repelled or survived that initial attack and stepped back, now you are in a "face off" and it should be no different than competition sparring.


----------



## ShortBridge (Jan 18, 2019)

KPM said:


> Sure!  Sparring can be seen as training, or sparring can be seen as competition.  There can be two very different approaches to sparring based upon which attitude you take. THAT is the dichotomy that is hard for people to come to grips with!  However, I see a less distinct dichotomy between sparring as competition to be won and when the "**** hits the  fan."   Fighting is fighting.  If someone accosts you on the street it may be very close quarters and a "self defense" situation, but the minute you have repelled or survived that initial attack and stepped back, now you are in a "face off" and it should be no different than competition sparring.



I still mostly disagree, but it's okay. 

Back in the 1700s, when I did those sorts of things, competition was totally different than sparring. Sparring is something that you do with sparring partners as part of your training. A boxing match, even a club fight was different than that. In a sport like boxing, they look very similar, but really aren't the same thing to the people coaching and competing. But, I've been away from sports like that for decades, so maybe things have changed. 

The scrapes I've been in in the real world felt and played out virtually nothing like any sparring session or boxing match I was ever in or at. Someone pulling a gun or knife on you, swinging a beer bottle at your head or ambushing you doesn't play out like a 2 minute round with rules in place. YouTube seems to have convinced a generation that it does. I'm just the old, out-of-touch LARPer suggesting that it isn't and not expecting to change any minds.

...which means I probably shouldn't be typing this. Let's see if I can stop...right after this post.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 18, 2019)

KPM said:


> *In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson.  That is what gives a system its particular look.  The biomechanics are based on the principles.  If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.*
> 
> ---Again, only to a certain extent and only with particular systems.   But if someone is training Wing Chun and pivoting on the heels to angle and generate power, and training the "step slide" or "drag step" for punching....and then starts swinging from the hips and pivoting on the ball of one foot like a boxer when sparring....and yet say they are still using "Wing Chun" principles.....they are not using biomechanics based upon Wing Chun principles.  I would not say that the biomechanics taught in the Wing Chun forms and drills are exaggerated.  They are a very specific thing, and if someone is not using those biomechanics in application, then can they be said to still be doing Wing Chun?
> 
> ...


I just don’t see it as necessarily abandoning the training.  I suppose it really does depend on the individual person and how skilled they are.  Certainly some people do simply abandon all they’ve learned, it can happen to anyone.  But what it looks like is not my first or second or third criteria for judging that.

It’s ok, I don’t mind the difference in opinion.


----------



## Buka (Jan 18, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Geezer,
> I would go as far as to say;
> those who adhere to strict adherence to a particular action or structure do not understand the wing chun system and do not understand the realities of physical conflict...(fighting). Mon Sao or any specific arm/hand structure is like stances. Snapshots in time.





gpseymour said:


> I tend to believe this of all systems. I obviously haven't experienced all of them, but this belief has never let me down.



Those^^ right there.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 18, 2019)

ShortBridge said:


> I still mostly disagree, but it's okay.
> 
> Back in the 1700s, when I did those sorts of things, competition was totally different than sparring. Sparring is something that you do with sparring partners as part of your training. A boxing match, even a club fight was different than that. In a sport like boxing, they look very similar, but really aren't the same thing to the people coaching and competing. But, I've been away from sports like that for decades, so maybe things have changed.
> 
> ...


I think some of that is a matter of definition of the term "sparring". It sounds to me like you use it like we'd use "scrimmage" in soccer. You can scrimmage during practice, or even with another team, but it's not taken very seriously. The rules may be entirely the same, but it's not really the same intensity as playing a "real" game. Under that kind of definition of sparring, it is distinctly different from competition.

I use "sparring" to refer to two people trying to hit each other, etc., in the context of MA. It can be light and technical, or can be for knock-out. The latter would have a lot more similarity with a full-contact competition than with anything else in the training hall.


----------



## KPM (Jan 18, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think some of that is a matter of definition of the term "sparring". It sounds to me like you use it like we'd use "scrimmage" in soccer. You can scrimmage during practice, or even with another team, but it's not taken very seriously. The rules may be entirely the same, but it's not really the same intensity as playing a "real" game. Under that kind of definition of sparring, it is distinctly different from competition.
> 
> I use "sparring" to refer to two people trying to hit each other, etc., in the context of MA. It can be light and technical, or can be for knock-out. The latter would have a lot more similarity with a full-contact competition than with anything else in the training hall.


 
I agree, and what I'm saying is that trying to survive in a competition when the other person is determined to knock you out is not so different than trying to survive on the street when someone is trying to kill you.  Fighting is fighting.   Anything less than trying to take the other guy out in sparring, is training as shortbridge described it.   A boxer or kickboxer or MMA guy wouldn't be expected to fight much differently in a "self-defense" situation than he would in the ring.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 18, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I just don’t see it as necessarily abandoning the training.


This concern has bothered me for many years.

The hip throw

- training is to spin the body (your opponent can spin with you and drag you down).
- application is to cut in through an angle without body spinning.

For many years, I could not decide whether I should train with "body spinning", or "cut in through an angle", or both. One day suddenly everything started to be clear in my mind. My life time is too short. I can't afford to waste it. To be able to kill 2 birds with 1 stone is always a better idea.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 18, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Geezer,
> I would go as far as to say;
> those who adhere to strict adherence to a particular action or structure do not understand the wing chun system and do not understand the realities of physical conflict...(fighting). Mon Sao or any specific arm/hand structure is like stances. Snapshots in time.


My fighting changed tremendously once I understood that you dont fight from stances, you transition through them constantly, and use them for the situation rather than choosing stances and trying to make the fight fit into the stance.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 19, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> My fighting changed tremendously once I understood that you dont fight from stances, you transition through them constantly, and use them for the situation rather than choosing stances and trying to make the fight fit into the stance.


This is one area some TMA instructors could do better at. They focus so much on getting the stances correctly correct that students spend all their time in them, never realizing they are snapshots, frames in a film reel of movement. If you're familiar with a hanmi or L-stance, imagine someone walking backwards using that stance over and over - that's the kind of thing that happens when students don't understand the purpose of the stances.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> This is one area some TMA instructors could do better at. They focus so much on getting the stances correctly correct that students spend all their time in them, never realizing they are snapshots, frames in a film reel of movement. If you're familiar with a hanmi or L-stance, imagine someone walking backwards using that stance over and over - that's the kind of thing that happens when students don't understand the purpose of the stances.


I was observing a yudansha (black belt and above) class today, and they were working on weapons kata. At one point, the instructor leading the exercise was trying to explain that there are multiple ways to get to the "stop points", and how you get there matters more than the stance in the picture. "What's in the middle matters."


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 19, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> My fighting changed tremendously once I understood that you dont fight from stances, you transition through them constantly, and use them for the situation rather than choosing stances and trying to make the fight fit into the stance.


Agree with you 100% there. Old Chinese saying said, "If you can run your opponent's down, you will have better chance to win in the ring." In order to run your opponent down, you will need body momentum and not stance. This is why it's important to learn how to punch when your feet is moving (not standing still).

People will also argue that why do you want to attack your opponent when he is moving away from you, the answer is simple, you are the bad guy and your opponent is the good guy.


----------



## geezer (Jan 19, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> My fighting changed tremendously once I understood that you dont fight from stances, you transition through them constantly, and use them for the situation rather than choosing stances and trying to make the fight fit into the stance.



This is how we look at the well known and much misunderstood Wing Chun pigeon-toed stance, _yee gee kim yeung ma_. It is used as a "training stance" for certain characteristics and more importantly, it is a position that you transfer through continuously as you turn and step.

In my opinion, that although WC is mostly characterized by short steps, but you need to be able to step and move quickly and freely in any direction. Old fashioned training methods with heavy emphasis on static stance work have been misunderstood in modern times, and have led to a common misunderstanding in this regard. Stances and steps must be quick, fluid, and above all, _natural _to be functional in any un-choreographed encounter.


----------



## ShortBridge (Jan 19, 2019)

In general, based on my own observations, I think that classic martial arts at least in the west tend to be better at teaching all of the compulsory training than the advanced training an application of their system. I doubt that there are many truly ineffective styles, but rounding out that training on the advanced level and applying it practically is something that I think most places struggle with. Hell, I struggle with it. 

Modern systems tend to focus almost entirely on that, which makes them more popular and contributes to the belief that they are more effective. In theory, they are different paths to the same place, but you have to get all of the training and do all of the work and I see a lot of good places and good martial artists struggling with rounding things out at the end. 

@geezer, I totally agree with your post above. The footwork in the weapons forms, the wooden man and probably the tri-pole for those who have it, greatly expand Wing Chun's mobility options, but I'm not sure how often those pieces get considered and explored that way. In addition, as you said, I train all of those stances, but the one's I use unscripted are not clearly and faithful reproductions of them most of the time. I can feel the inward pressure of my natural, neutral stance, because it's there, but it's not obviously yee gee kim yeung ma. 

In your original post, I intentionally didn't take the bait on this, but my normal physical posture toward a threat is not the classic Ip Man movie bladed, foot forward hands extended position. For a number of reasons, I don't practice or teach people to stand that way from outside of a bridge position.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 19, 2019)

Stance is low level understanding, footwork & mobility is higher level. Being able to trip & sweep and not getting tripped or swept are byproducts of understanding and using good footwork. Being able to enter & egress with changing angles is a byproduct of good footwork. Good mobility and footwork is being able to move one's center of gravity, body mass, and feet in coordination with the arms and hands working to strike, seize, trap, parry, or whatever simultaneously. It isn't about being in a particular stance.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 19, 2019)

ShortBridge said:


> The footwork in the weapons forms, the wooden man and probably the tri-pole for those who have it, greatly expand Wing Chun's mobility options, but I'm not sure how often those pieces get considered and explored that way.


IMO, to emphasize footwork during the weapon and wooden dummy training time may be too late. The important of footwork should be addressed during day one.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The important of footwork should be addressed during day one.


^^^^This:
I agree.


----------



## KPM (Jan 19, 2019)

geezer said:


> This is how we look at the well known and much misunderstood Wing Chun pigeon-toed stance, _yee gee kim yeung ma_. It is used as a "training stance" for certain characteristics and more importantly, it is a position that you transfer through continuously as you turn and step.
> 
> In my opinion, that although WC is mostly characterized by short steps, but you need to be able to step and move quickly and freely in any direction. Old fashioned training methods with heavy emphasis on static stance work have been misunderstood in modern times, and have led to a common misunderstanding in this regard. Stances and steps must be quick, fluid, and above all, _natural _to be functional in any un-choreographed encounter.


 
Are you saying that Leung Ting drag step isn't practical???


----------



## jobo (Jan 19, 2019)

KPM said:


> I agree, and what I'm saying is that trying to survive in a competition when the other person is determined to knock you out is not so different than trying to survive on the street when someone is trying to kill you.  Fighting is fighting.   Anything less than trying to take the other guy out in sparring, is training as shortbridge described it.   A boxer or kickboxer or MMA guy wouldn't be expected to fight much differently in a "self-defense" situation than he would in the ring.


no ring fights are not a copy of REAL fights, there not close, I spar with a reasonably talented kick boxer, oit session consist of me try to not get kicked, till I manage to get hold of him, then it's fight over, in a real fight there wouurnt be 5 mins of dodging, I'd just take the kick in order to get a grip of him, then throw him about like a rag doll, in a kickboxing contest I'd loose on points ever time 

fights are sudden and brutal and instant, they no feeling out looking for openings, there no ref there's no bell to tell you to be ready and nobody wins on pointst, you get one chance mess it up and it's over


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 19, 2019)

jobo said:


> ring fights are not a copy of REAL fights,


In

- ring fight, your opponent is a MA guy.
- street fight, your opponent is an average guy who may not even know any MA.

You may have experienced in a street fight that your opponent's fist landed on your body that didn't hurt at all. Also in street fight, your opponent is always a honest guy (no fake move, no set up, no strategy, ...).


----------



## jobo (Jan 19, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In
> 
> - ring fight, your opponent is a MA guy.
> - street fight, your opponent is an average guy who may not even know any MA.
> ...


 and there's no weight decision, no warning  , he will have mates, they always have mates . and that honest guy may have a bottle or a knife or a Pitbull, and then you crash into a crowd of people and tables,  you don't know who your punches and who is punching you, lose you footing on a beer soaked dancefloor and over you go, its fast and very chaotic, and God help you if you punch a bouncer by mistake, have you ever been in a ballroom blitz


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 19, 2019)

jobo said:


> and there's no weight decision, no warning  , he will have mates, they always have mates . and that honest guy may have a bottle or a knife or a Pitbull, and then you crash into a crowd of people and tables,  you don't know who your punches and who is punching you, lose you footing on a beer soaked dancefloor and over you go, its fast and very chaotic, and God help you if you punch a bouncer by mistake, have you ever been in a ballroom blitz


1. There's no weight decision - You weight 360 lb.
2. He will have mates - You own an assassin's creed.
3. That honest guy may have a bottle or a knife or a Pitbull - You have a Walther PPK in your pocket 24-7.
4. God help you if you punch a bouncer by mistake - You don't punch. You kill.


----------



## geezer (Jan 19, 2019)

KPM said:


> Are you saying that Leung Ting drag step isn't practical???



Actually Keith, at first I believed my old sifu's advice at face value and thought if I trained hard enough I could make a pure, 100% back-weighted "drag-step" work.

Then after a good long time, I got a bit smarter and decided that although it still didn't work for me in terms of mobility, that it was basically training some good attributes through intentional overstatement or exaggeration. For example, the back weighting free's up the front leg to use to wedge-in, sweep, kick, knee, and defend while maintaining a stable rear-leg root ...all especially useful in close striking range.

Later, still unable to move easily, I sort of lost the faith and deviated more and more from the drag-step model, using various weightings and stepping modes, perhaps unconsciously reflecting my involvement in an escrima system influenced by boxing. But I still taught the drag-step to lower level students year after year.

Now, I've come to think that all those years ...heck, all those _decades_ of demonstrating and leading drills while drag-stepping has had a funny side effect. In trying to make the nearly impossible drag-step work, especially on the high-friction flooring in some of the gyms we've been using, I unconsciously developed a way of tightening my core and popping my hips forward as I stepped to break the friction on the weighted foot and move it forward. It's a small movement, but it effectively _throws my whole body into my punch _and has really helped my short-range power generation ...at a stage in life when almost everything else has, by contrast, gotten weaker.

So maybe that counterintuitive drag-step really does serve many valuable functions. It's just that easy, fluid movement isn't one of them!


----------



## geezer (Jan 19, 2019)

You know, in that last post, my assessment of the WT lineage's "drag step" is a lot like my take on _yee gee kim yeung ma._ Rest assured that if my posts seem to reflect a logical and conceptual consistency, it is entirely accidental, or the result of the beers I drank at dinner. I took the wife out. It is Saturday night and all.


----------



## ShortBridge (Jan 20, 2019)

geezer said:


> You know, in that last post, my assessment of the WT lineage's "drag step" is a lot like my take on _yee gee kim yeung ma._ Rest assured that if my posts seem to reflect a logical and conceptual consistency, it is entirely accidental, or the result of the beers I drank at dinner. I took the wife out. It is Saturday night and all.



So you're saying you...got dressed up, took your wife out for a nice dinner, came home and ... posted on Martial Talk?

Please see my post #28 above about being really good at all of the compulsory steps, but not finishing!


----------



## KPM (Jan 20, 2019)

jobo said:


> no ring fights are not a copy of REAL fights, there not close, I spar with a reasonably talented kick boxer, oit session consist of me try to not get kicked, till I manage to get hold of him, then it's fight over, in a real fight there wouurnt be 5 mins of dodging, I'd just take the kick in order to get a grip of him, then throw him about like a rag doll, in a kickboxing contest I'd loose on points ever time
> 
> fights are sudden and brutal and instant, they no feeling out looking for openings, there no ref there's no bell to tell you to be ready and nobody wins on pointst, you get one chance mess it up and it's over



But again, fighting is fighting.  I didn't say ring fights were a "copy" of real fights.  Sure there is going to be different circumstances, different levels of threat, etc.   I noted that if you survive the initial surprise and then end up in a "face off" before the next exchange then it isn't so different.  The skills you use are going to be the  skills you trained.  You may very dodge someone trying to kick you on the street a couple of times before you manage to take one of his kicks and throw him.  Or...in the ring you may very well find the opportunity to take one of his kicks and throw him!  Fighting is fighting.  Again, would you expect the typical MMA guy to do something completely different when defending himself on the street compared to fighting in the ring?  Wouldn't you expect his mechanics to be pretty much the same?  Isn't he going to be throwing the same punches and kicks?  Doing the same takedowns?


----------



## KPM (Jan 20, 2019)

geezer said:


> that it was basically training some good attributes through intentional overstatement or exaggeration.



Now think on this guys......what other sport or physical activity spends a huge percentage of its time training and practicing very exaggerated versions of the movements or mechanics it truly intends to use???


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 20, 2019)

KPM said:


> Now think on this guys......what other sport or physical activity spends a huge percentage of its time training and practicing very exaggerated versions of the movements or mechanics it truly intends to use???


I've been thinking about this lately. And I think teaching sports to kids is a reasonable example. If you show kids the same tennis swing a pro would use, they will do odd parts wrong. If you exaggerate parts of it, they'll exaggerate those more. If you exaggerate just exactly the right things, you can get them to develop the right mechanics.

The issue in that model comes when one of those children tries to teach another child, before getting to the stage where they truly understand what they are doing. They start teaching the exaggeration as the proper swing. I think it's possible that's what we see in many traditional arts. I don't know if it explains WC, or the arts I trained in, but it's an explanation I've been toying with.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I was observing a yudansha (black belt and above) class today, and they were working on weapons kata. At one point, the instructor leading the exercise was trying to explain that there are multiple ways to get to the "stop points", and how you get there matters more than the stance in the picture. "What's in the middle matters."


Yup.  You don’t get power from a stance.  You get power from the transition between one stance to another.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 20, 2019)

KPM said:


> Now think on this guys......what other sport or physical activity spends a huge percentage of its time training and practicing very exaggerated versions of the movements or mechanics it truly intends to use???


The 

- solo training is trying to push your body limitation to the maximum.
- application is to use the least amount of force to achieve the maximum result.

This is application.







This is solo training.


----------



## geezer (Jan 20, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Yup.  You don’t get power from a stance.  You get power from the transition between one stance to another.



Very true ...since power requires motion, and if your power is generated using your entire body, then your whole body must be involved in that motion, although the movement may be quite small.

On the other hand, there are useful methods of striking that don't engage whole body movement the same way, in which a static, rooted stance is used to keep from bleeding off whatever power you have.


----------



## KPM (Jan 20, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The
> 
> - solo training is trying to push your body limitation to the maximum.
> - application is to use the least amount of force to achieve the maximum result.
> ...



That looks like pretty much the same thing, just the second one doesn't have a partner.  I wouldn't say that is "greatly exaggerated."

Do runners greatly exaggerate their running mechanics in training?  Do tennis players greatly exaggerate the motions of their serve compared to the actual serve?  Do boxers greatly exaggerate the mechanics of their punch compared to how they punch in the ring?  Do ice skaters greatly exaggerate their jumps and spins compared to what they do in competition?   To say that the mechanics of your martial art that you are using 90% of the time in training are "exaggerated" to the point that when you apply them in a real situation they are unrecognizable just seems a bit odd.


----------



## KPM (Jan 20, 2019)

Here is some more "food for thought".

The typical attacker on the street may have malicious intent, but is most likely not a skilled fighter.  They are typically expecting an easy target, not someone that is going to fight back....and certainly not someone who is a martial artist.  So if you survive that initial attack and end up in more of "squared off to fight" situation, chances are you will be facing someone less skilled than you and that will be taken by surprise BY YOU, because they will not be expecting you to put up any kind of real fight.   So in some respects, once you overcome the fear and nerves and survive what was likely a surprise attack or sucker punch, this should be easier than facing a skilled competitor that knows your style and is expecting you to "bring it."  So if you can't make your martial are work in a hard sparring or competition situation, how do you expect to make it work on the street?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 20, 2019)

geezer said:


> Very true ...since power requires motion, and if your power is generated using your entire body, then your whole body must be involved in that motion, although the movement may be quite small.
> 
> On the other hand, there are useful methods of striking that don't engage whole body movement the same way, in which a static, rooted stance is used to keep from bleeding off whatever power you have.


True.  Yet that static, rooted stance still has some pressing from the feet which still engages the body and adds to the power.  It still is not only arm/shoulder driven.  It still gets power from the foundation.

This is an example of an application that has dropped the larger movement.  I’ll bet bucks that it works better if you go through the process of training larger movement first, which likely also includes a stance change.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 20, 2019)

KPM said:


> That looks like pretty much the same thing, just the second one doesn't have a partner.  I wouldn't say that is "greatly exaggerated."
> 
> Do runners greatly exaggerate their running mechanics in training?  Do tennis players greatly exaggerate the motions of their serve compared to the actual serve?  Do boxers greatly exaggerate the mechanics of their punch compared to how they punch in the ring?  Do ice skaters greatly exaggerate their jumps and spins compared to what they do in competition?   To say that the mechanics of your martial art that you are using 90% of the time in training are "exaggerated" to the point that when you apply them in a real situation they are unrecognizable just seems a bit odd.


Runners do drills that include exaggerated movements.

I don’t know much about the others.  I don’t play tennis, don’t ice skate, don’t Box.  But if they don’t, they should.


----------



## KPM (Jan 20, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Runners do drills that include exaggerated movements.
> 
> .



As a small part of their training, not as the majority of their training.  Would you expect a runner in competition to look nothing like the same runner in training?


----------



## PiedmontChun (Jan 21, 2019)

I've learned things in multiple arts that were exaggerated in practice and became much more streamlined in practice. Its not that the exaggerated way is wrong or ineffective, but speed or resistance changes the dynamic of the movement. We drilled a BJJ guard pass on the ground the other day that if the guy on his back just laid there and let you do it - its a simply awful, punishing technique that stacks and compresses their legs into their body until they *want* you to clear their legs and just get a dominant side control on them already. The reality is in sparring though, the guy on the bottom is going to fight to make some distance and not get stacked, move their hips to change the angle and take some pressure off, etc. So the pass still works, but some of the nuance is skipped and it doesn't look the same if the guy knows how to move and resist it. If you learned it just by watching it in action with resistance, you would think it was just one thing and would not have the wider knowledge of the technique gained by drilling it the more exaggerated way.

As far as in WC jusst across the board - I remember chi-sau'ing with technician level WT guys and it seemed like their movements were just effortless and fluid, far less "digital" than the forms and drills I was working on to the point it was unrecognizable at times. But the rigid forms / drills that all of this movement was based on had to be grasped first for them.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 21, 2019)

KPM said:


> Now think on this guys......what other sport or physical activity spends a huge percentage of its time training and practicing very exaggerated versions of the movements or mechanics it truly intends to use???


In thinking back over the many years I can recall every athletic thing I trained has some practice with exaggerated movement. Today I teach especially new things with a slow exaggerated movement and then refine from there. That stated I don't recall an huge percentage of time practicing such especially once the gross motions were known. From time to time a bit of it, yes but any huge percentage of time? Nope. Not even in all the different martial arts I've trained except for forms training and that is only a small part of what we train.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 21, 2019)

KPM said:


> As a small part of their training, not as the majority of their training.  Would you expect a runner in competition to look nothing like the same runner in training?


I understand that exaggerated movement is part of the training process.

Opinions may differ on how much is appropriate.


----------



## yak sao (Jan 21, 2019)

PiedmontChun said:


> ' - I remember chi-sau'ing with technician level WT guys and it seemed like their movements were just effortless and fluid, far less "digital" than the forms and drills I was working on to the point it was unrecognizable at times. But the rigid forms / drills that all of this movement was based on had to be grasped first for them.



To watch my old WT sifu in action, many times it would just look like he was chain punching.
But when he slowed it down and showed what just took place, there would be a tan sau, a bong sau, a pak sau ....
He had become so proficient at the movements that they almost didn't exist. They were split seconds in time.

Same with footwork. What looks choppy and unworkable in a beginner, becomes effortless and very natural-looking when you see someone who's advanced doing the same movements


----------



## KPM (Jan 21, 2019)

Sure.  There is some value in exaggerating things to emphasize a certain aspect of training, or to help teach to beginners.  But this is not what I'm talking about.  Further up in the discussion it was said that martial arts based on principles won't look like what they train when applying them.  I pointed out that the biomechanics of a martial art are just as important as the principles.  The forms and drills teach a specific way to move that is unique to that particular martial art.  So why wouldn't someone using that martial art in a fight or sparring situation actually LOOK like that martial art?   The response was this:

*In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson. That is what gives a system its particular look. The biomechanics are based on the principles. If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.*

This is the way of thinking that I am questioning and that doesn't make sense to me.  If all of your forms and drills and training are so exaggerated that they don't look anything like what you are applying, then this is unlike ANY other sport or physical activity I know of.  No other physical activity that I am aware of spends all of their training time greatly exaggerating their biomechanics to the point that it looks "quite different" when they actually use or apply what they have been training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 21, 2019)

KPM said:


> Sure.  There is some value in exaggerating things to emphasize a certain aspect of training, or to help teach to beginners.  But this is not what I'm talking about.  Further up in the discussion it was said that martial arts based on principles won't look like what they train when applying them.  I pointed out that the biomechanics of a martial art are just as important as the principles.  The forms and drills teach a specific way to move that is unique to that particular martial art.  So why wouldn't someone using that martial art in a fight or sparring situation actually LOOK like that martial art?   The response was this:
> 
> *In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson. That is what gives a system its particular look. The biomechanics are based on the principles. If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.*
> 
> This is the way of thinking that I am questioning and that doesn't make sense to me.  If all of your forms and drills and training are so exaggerated that they don't look anything like what you are applying, then this is unlike ANY other sport or physical activity I know of.  No other physical activity that I am aware of spends all of their training time greatly exaggerating their biomechanics to the point that it looks "quite different" when they actually use or apply what they have been training.


Let me give an example from outside WC, to see if this helps. When I train/teach primary aiki principles, those are best learned by using a stylized approach. The attacks get somewhat exaggerated, so they will consistently feed the inputs needed to practice specifically aiki responses. Because of the exaggerated inputs, the response has to use exaggerated motion (in fact, part of the training is to match the response to the input in this manner). So, if you watched me doing what we call "classical technique" training, then watched me using the same techniques in freestyle grappling, it would look like two different styles - even if I was using the aiki versions of those techniques. But to those who train the style, they'd immediately recognize one as a specific kind of training and the other as the application of that training. 

It sounds to me like folks are saying the same thing about their WC training. And that would lead me to expect the same caveat: if you do too much of the stylized stuff, you won't be able to make the transition to the actual application. Your attempt would look more like the stylized training drill, but wouldn't match the input, so would fail.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Let me give an example from outside WC, to see if this helps.


When I train the "front cut" solo drill, I will touch my hand on the ground. It can help me to train both

- flexibility, and
- commitment.






If I can still do like this old man did when he was 72 years old, my body flexibility will be OK. How to maintain that body flexibility? The answer is "exaggeration move".


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 22, 2019)

KPM said:


> Sure.  There is some value in exaggerating things to emphasize a certain aspect of training, or to help teach to beginners.  But this is not what I'm talking about.  Further up in the discussion it was said that martial arts based on principles won't look like what they train when applying them.  I pointed out that the biomechanics of a martial art are just as important as the principles.  The forms and drills teach a specific way to move that is unique to that particular martial art.  So why wouldn't someone using that martial art in a fight or sparring situation actually LOOK like that martial art?   The response was this:
> 
> *In training, those biomechanics are exaggerated as a way to emphasize the lesson. That is what gives a system its particular look. The biomechanics are based on the principles. If you are using the principles, then the biomechanics are still there, even if no longer exaggerated. So again, in combat, it can look quite different.*
> 
> This is the way of thinking that I am questioning and that doesn't make sense to me.  If all of your forms and drills and training are so exaggerated that they don't look anything like what you are applying, then this is unlike ANY other sport or physical activity I know of.  No other physical activity that I am aware of spends all of their training time greatly exaggerating their biomechanics to the point that it looks "quite different" when they actually use or apply what they have been training.


This may be something that requires face-to-face work in order to adequately convey how it works.  In the mean time, if it has not been part of your experience then it may simply not make sense to you.  Nothing wrong with that.

I will say though that the exaggeration is not so much that it looks NOTHING like how you would actually use it.  The punches still look like punches, for example.  But we exaggerate the body rotation in practice, to reinforce the lessons on full body connection.  In actual use, the exaggeration goes away but the body connection has been established and is still there.

We do not see this as something that you would grow out of and advance beyond the need to continue the practice.  We see it as something that always benefits from further practice, so we keep doing it.  In that regard it’s a bit like a musician practicing scales.  It is so fundamental to the method that it is always a big part of the practice.


----------



## jobo (Jan 22, 2019)

id


KPM said:


> Here is some more "food for thought".
> 
> The typical attacker on the street may have malicious intent, but is most likely not a skilled fighter.  They are typically expecting an easy target, not someone that is going to fight back....and certainly not someone who is a martial artist.  So if you survive that initial attack and end up in more of "squared off to fight" situation, chances are you will be facing someone less skilled than you and that will be taken by surprise BY YOU, because they will not be expecting you to put up any kind of real fight.   So in some respects, once you overcome the fear and nerves and survive what was likely a surprise attack or sucker punch, this should be easier than facing a skilled competitor that knows your style and is expecting you to "bring it."  So if you can't make your martial are work in a hard sparring or competition situation, how do you expect to make it work on the street?[/QUOTEI'd sayou try information to build a very narrow set of circumstances, certainly if you face someone with no fighting skills, poor fitness and slow reactions then you have every chance of winning, but people like that don't normally attack peopke in the street, unless they are drunk and or have big mates with them.
> 
> ...


----------



## jobo (Jan 22, 2019)

KPM said:


> Here is some more "food for thought".
> 
> The typical attacker on the street may have malicious intent, but is most likely not a skilled fighter.  They are typically expecting an easy target, not someone that is going to fight back....and certainly not someone who is a martial artist.  So if you survive that initial attack and end up in more of "squared off to fight" situation, chances are you will be facing someone less skilled than you and that will be taken by surprise BY YOU, because they will not be expecting you to put up any kind of real fight.   So in some respects, once you overcome the fear and nerves and survive what was likely a surprise attack or sucker punch, this should be easier than facing a skilled competitor that knows your style and is expecting you to "bring it."  So if you can't make your martial are work in a hard sparring or competition situation, how do you expect to make it work on the street?


'id sayou tryING to build a very narrow set of circumstances, certainly if you face someone with no fighting skills, poor fitness and slow reactions then you have every chance of winning, but people like that don't normally attack peopke in the street, unless they are drunk and or have big mates with them. t  here are people who have been fighting every week since they were five, by the time they get to 25 they have built up a set of dependable fighting skills, they may not have many techniques, but they are proficient in what they do, if they have also been weight training, work in a manual job or play sports, then they will be quite a handful, I'd say a street attack is far more likely to come from the second group, if your thinking you won't get attack by someone very strong, very fast who can throw a good puntry and just walk through your best effort then your living in fantasy land.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 22, 2019)

Here is an example that "exaggeration" is used to develop

- body method, and 
- power generation. 

This kind of training may be foreign to WC guys, but it's quite common used in the northern CMA systems.


----------



## KPM (Jan 22, 2019)

jobo said:


> 'id sayou tryING to build a very narrow set of circumstances, certainly if you face someone with no fighting skills, poor fitness and slow reactions then you have every chance of winning, but people like that don't normally attack peopke in the street, unless they are drunk and or have big mates with them. t  here are people who have been fighting every week since they were five, by the time they get to 25 they have built up a set of dependable fighting skills, they may not have many techniques, but they are proficient in what they do, if they have also been weight training, work in a manual job or play sports, then they will be quite a handful, I'd say a street attack is far more likely to come from the second group, if your thinking you won't get attack by someone very strong, very fast who can throw a good puntry and just walk through your best effort then your living in fantasy land.


 
Ok.  So again.......someone's martial art training won't hold up to hard sparring or competition, yet you think think they would be able to handle the guy you just described???


----------



## jobo (Jan 22, 2019)

KPM said:


> Ok.  So again.......someone's martial art training won't hold up to hard sparring or competition, yet you think think they would be able to handle the guy you just described???


no that wasn't the part of your missive I was disagreeing with, it was everything else you said that was WRONG,..or to put it another way, even hard sparing may not been sufficient to prepare you to fight a street attack,


----------



## KPM (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> no that wasn't the part of your missive I was disagreeing with, it was everything else you said that was WRONG,..or to put it another way, even hard sparing may not been sufficient to prepare you to fight a street attack,



But my "missive" was in response to the idea that sparring and "real fighting" are so different.  I was providing instances in which they wouldn't be.


----------



## jobo (Jan 23, 2019)

KPM said:


> But my "missive" was in response to the idea that sparring and "real fighting" are so different.  I was providing instances in which they wouldn't be.


you also went on at length about how any attacker is likely less skilled than you, which is optimistic to say the least. it rather depends who is attacking you and why. 
sparing as most arts do it has little resemblance to how the vast majority of fights go down. and is als very much dependent on competency in  the group, it's easy for a dozen people to convince themselves and hey are good when they only ever fight each other. 
if you want to try your skills, go in to a rough bar, find some big bloke and tell him his wife is ugly, let me know how you go on !


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> you also went on at length about how any attacker is likely less skilled than you, which is optimistic to say the least. it rather depends who is attacking you and why.



I wouldn't say it's all that optimistic. I see lots of people who have been in fights. A lot. Probably a half dozen or so in the last 12 hours.
I don't think any of them had any real skills.
The vast majority of the world has zero training.


----------



## jobo (Jan 23, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> I wouldn't say it's all that optimistic. I see lots of people who have been in fights. A lot. Probably a half dozen or so in the last 12 hours.
> I don't think any of them had any real skills.
> The vast majority of the world has zero training.


that's a rather bias d sample, as it's the ones who have lost that end up in ER,  and how have you assessed their skills or lack thereof. 

a fair % of t he world have basic fighting skills, developed through fighting and augmented with weight lifting, the only time weak people with no fighting skills attack you us if they are drunk, or insane, or there are lots of them, 

a trained ma, may well be better than 80% of the population, but it's the other 20% that are likely to attack you,


----------



## KPM (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> you also went on at length about how any attacker is likely less skilled than you, which is optimistic to say the least. it rather depends who is attacking you and why.
> sparing as most arts do it has little resemblance to how the vast majority of fights go down. and is als very much dependent on competency in  the group, it's easy for a dozen people to convince themselves and hey are good when they only ever fight each other.
> if you want to try your skills, go in to a rough bar, find some big bloke and tell him his wife is ugly, let me know how you go on !



And.....again.....if someone can't even function all that well in sparring, how the heck are they going to do well against your "big bloke" in your "rough bar"???  THAT has been my point!


----------



## jobo (Jan 23, 2019)

KPM said:


> And.....again.....if someone can't even function all that well in sparring, how the heck are they going to do well against your "big bloke" in your "rough bar"???  THAT has been my point!


And the out come may well be exactly the same, if you spar or not, which makes sparing a waste of time, unless your sparing against opponents of a calibre and physical standard to match the big bloke in the bar, even then he may blind side you with a pool cue strike to the temple


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> And the out come may well be exactly the same, if you spar or not, which makes sparing a waste of time, unless your sparing against opponents of a calibre and physical standard to match the big bloke in the bar, even then he may blind side you with a pool cue strike to the temple


That last one's a specious argument, Jobo. I could say the same kid of thing about literally any kind of training, at any level. Why bother to train troops? It won't help them survive being run over by a tank. Why bother to train pilots? It won't help them fly a plane if the wing falls off.

Unforeseen things can happen anywhere. You can't use the extremes to discount the value of any training. It's more useful to look at what it can help with. And there's reasonable evidence that sparring-heavy disciplines (like boxing) produce skills that work, even against a big bloke.


----------



## jobo (Jan 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> That last one's a specious argument, Jobo. I could say the same kid of thing about literally any kind of training, at any level. Why bother to train troops? It won't help them survive being run over by a tank. Why bother to train pilots? It won't help them fly a plane if the wing falls off.
> 
> Unforeseen things can happen anywhere. You can't use the extremes to discount the value of any training. It's more useful to look at what it can help with. And there's reasonable evidence that sparring-heavy disciplines (like boxing) produce skills that work, even against a big bloke.


its not an extreme, getting into conflict with a big blokes, with big biceps and a 24 " neck, is not at all unlikely as there the people who go round throwing their weight about and trying to intimidate people, maybe you don't get them in the middle class suburb's, ?  getting blindsided by a pool cue strike is not at all unusual in rough bars, I had a lump the size of a large egg, when it happened to me, through no one has ever got me with a glass, though several have tried.

its not a case of not bothering, it's a case of being realistic, about how far sparring with a brown belt that also has never had an adult fight, against someone who can actually fight, is going to prepared you for a real genuine potential life changing encounter,

this discussion started when kpm, insisted that in any street fight he would have a marked advantage in skill, and that's an unrealistic expectations, if the definition of fightbg skill is the ability to destroy another human being very quickly, rather than having 8 different kicks


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> if you want to try your skills, go in to a rough bar, find some big bloke and tell him his wife is ugly, let me know how you go on !


Last time I fought someone on the street, the guy screamed, "Please, please don't kill me." (exactly words came out of his mouth.) That guy tried to pull a girl into his car. I gave him a back neck choke. He let the girl go. I let him go. Everybody lived happy after that.

If you don't consider yourself as the prey, you will find out that there are not that many predators around.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> its not an extreme, getting into conflict with a big blokes, with big biceps and a 24 " neck, is not at all unlikely as there the people who go round throwing their weight about and trying to intimidate people, maybe you don't get them in the middle class suburb's, ?  getting blindsided by a pool cue strike is not at all unusual in rough bars, I had a lump the size of a large egg, when it happened to me, through no one has ever got me with a glass, though several have tried.


I didn't say it was unusual (and the size of the bloke is immaterial). I said it was an extreme. Self defense of ANY sort is entirely useless if you don't get to use it...like that pilot's flying skills if the wings fall off.



> its not a case of not bothering, it's a case of being realistic, about how far sparring with a brown belt that also has never had an adult fight, against someone who can actually fight, is going to prepared you for a real genuine potential life changing encounter,
> 
> this discussion started when kpm, insisted that in any street fight he would have a marked advantage in skill, and that's an unrealistic expectations, if the definition of fightbg skill is the ability to destroy another human being very quickly, rather than having 8 different kicks


The folks I know who've been in physical altercations - myself included, though I've had danged few in my post-teen life - found most folks to be brawlers with not a lot of skill. Those who were trained tended to have more success in those situations than those who didn't, by a significant margin. This includes input from cops, bouncers, and other folks whose jobs put them at higher risk, as well as folks who just got into fights in college.

You're right that people who get into bar fights are more likely to be experienced at bar fights. But most of the physical altercations these people experienced weren't of that variety (except for the folks who got into fights in college - they experienced pretty much what you're talking about).

The point KPM is trying to make is that sparring does help. We have some decent evidence of that, though we'll never be able to make that really scientific. Anecdotal evidence suggests a lot of the people who initiate altercations aren't really great at handling someone who knows how to control space and timing, which is what good sparring tends to help develop. Then there's the whole thing about getting a little familiar with getting hit, so it's not as startling when it happens, and less likely to confuse even when it's a surprise.


----------



## jobo (Jan 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I didn't say it was unusual (and the size of the bloke is immaterial). I said it was an extreme. Self defense of ANY sort is entirely useless if you don't get to use it...like that pilot's flying skills if the wings fall off.
> 
> 
> The folks I know who've been in physical altercations - myself included, though I've had danged few in my post-teen life - found most folks to be brawlers with not a lot of skill. Those who were trained tended to have more success in those situations than those who didn't, by a significant margin. This includes input from cops, bouncers, and other folks whose jobs put them at higher risk, as well as folks who just got into fights in college.
> ...


the point kpm made and I took issue with is quite clear and not what you and he now says it was,
he said he would have more skill than an attacker, not that sparring helps,( which he also said) which I can only agree with, but it only helps if you win, it didn't help at all if you got beaten up anyway.

that aside, brawling is a fighting skills, blind siding you for the first strike is a common ploy, and then they brawl you to death, controling distance is difficult if they have both hands round your throat and their knee in your chest,

these are the common things that occur in brawls, spar ring that doesn't mimic life is fantasy , fighting skills that will never come in to use apart from an idealised situation wgen they tell you they are comibg to attack

when you learn to fight back after somebody has wacked you very hard with a cue or a fist is when you have reasonable self defence skills


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> the point kpm made and I took issue with is quite clear and not what you and he now says it was,
> he said he would have more skill than an attacker, not that sparring helps,( which he also said) which I can only agree with, but it only helps if you win, it didn't help at all if you got beaten up anyway.
> 
> that aside, brawling is a fighting skills, blind siding you for the first strike is a common ploy, and then they brawl you to death, controling distance is difficult if they have both hands round your throat and their knee in your chest,
> ...


You live in a very strange world there inside your head, Jobo.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You live in a very strange world there inside your head, Jobo.


If you don't think that you can handle a fight, why are you training MA for? It's not fun to live in a world that you believe everybody all try to beat you up.


----------



## KPM (Jan 23, 2019)

jobo said:


> i
> 
> this discussion started when kpm, insisted that in any street fight he would have a marked advantage in skill, and that's an unrealistic expectations, if the definition of fightbg skill is the ability to destroy another human being very quickly, rather than having 8 different kicks



I did NOT say "any street fighter."   I already pointed out that I was simply giving you a circumstance where you were wrong in your assertions.   And Dirty Dog, who I believe actually deals with such encounters on a pretty regular basis, backed up the circumstance I was pointing out.  Sure, you might come up against your "big bloke" if you are hanging out in disreputable bars.  But you are just as likely to come across the unskilled thug hoping for an easy target in a dark parking lot after a long day a work.   But....bottom-line....fighting is fighting.   If someone has problems getting their martial art and what they have trained to work in a sparring situation, they are very likely to have trouble getting it to work in a real situation.  Control of timing, distance, power generation, and reaction to stress and adrenaline are all things that are learned in hard sparring.  And these are things that are likely to come in very handy in a street fight.   So your assertion that sparring and fighting on the street are nothing alike is just not accurate.  I'm not saying this is you.....but this kind of argument is exactly what I've heard over the years from people that essentially only train forms and drills and never spar or really pressure test what they are training but still like to have this fantasy about what a great fighter they are and how they could take on any of those MMA guys if they had to.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 23, 2019)

KPM said:


> And these are things that are likely to come in very handy in a street fight.


Let's make this discussion simple. If you hit on your heavy bag 100 times daily, in 1 year you have hit on your heavy bag 36,000 times. In 10 years, you have hit on heavy bag 365,000 times. Comparing to an average street guy who may not even hit on heavy bag at all, if you still lose a fight against this guy, you should get a rope, find a quite place, and hang yourself.


----------



## KPM (Jan 24, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's make this discussion simple. If you hit on your heavy bag 100 times daily, in 1 year you have hit on your heavy bag 36,000 times. In 10 years, you have hit on heavy bag 365,000 times. Comparing to an average street guy who may not even hit on heavy bag at all, if you still lose a fight against this guy, you should get a rope, find a quite place, and hang yourself.



But what if that street guy has been scrappy enough to have learned a little bit of evasive boxing footwork and manages to stay just out of range of your amazing heavy bag punch?  What if you never have the opportunity to land that punch because you have spent all of your time punching a bag and have never squared off in front of someone and actually tried to do it for real against a partner that is doing their best to keep you from landing it???


----------



## jobo (Jan 24, 2019)

KPM said:


> I did NOT say "any street fighter."   I already pointed out that I was simply giving you a circumstance where you were wrong in your assertions.   And Dirty Dog, who I believe actually deals with such encounters on a pretty regular basis, backed up the circumstance I was pointing out.  Sure, you might come up against your "big bloke" if you are hanging out in disreputable bars.  But you are just as likely to come across the unskilled thug hoping for an easy target in a dark parking lot after a long day a work.   But....bottom-line....fighting is fighting.   If someone has problems getting their martial art and what they have trained to work in a sparring situation, they are very likely to have trouble getting it to work in a real situation.  Control of timing, distance, power generation, and reaction to stress and adrenaline are all things that are learned in hard sparring.  And these are things that are likely to come in very handy in a street fight.   So your assertion that sparring and fighting on the street are nothing alike is just not accurate.  I'm not saying this is you.....but this kind of argument is exactly what I've heard over the years from people that essentially only train forms and drills and never spar or really pressure test what they are training but still like to have this fantasy about what a great fighter they are and how they could take on any of those MMA guys if they had to.


How have you come to the conckusion " it's just as likely" there no data or rational to support that , small weak uncoordinated people don't go round attacking people ,unless they brink a knife or some friends, 

But ok if your attacked buy an unarmed 140 lbs guy with little strength and very poor co ordination, and no mates,who attacks from the front and gives you warning if his intent , you will possibly win with ease 

Change any of tgose and the odds against you increase dramatically, 

Il accept your point on the benifit of sparring, but its not as straight firward as you sugest as being sparring against non sparring . Ma clubs set  up a positive feed back loop, where they only spar with each other, and as non of them can actually fight, they get the impression they are far more capable than they are .if your telling me you can destroy any of you partners in 10 seconds, then may be your good, if Nigel the accountant is matching you then perhaps not,  go and do some full contact contests, if you want a reality check, or pip down the MMA gym and fight a few beginers,


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 24, 2019)

KPM said:


> But....bottom-line....fighting is fighting. If someone has problems getting their martial art and what they have trained to work in a sparring situation, they are very likely to have trouble getting it to work in a real situation.


I think this is the key point for discussion, really. If you can't make the system (not necessarily individual techniques) work in some kind of relatively open sparring, it probably has issues - or you do. That's no guarantee it's going to be useful in any given defensive situation, but the odds are better if it works in sparring. And there's really only one way to know that answer.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 24, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's make this discussion simple. If you hit on your heavy bag 100 times daily, in 1 year you have hit on your heavy bag 36,000 times. In 10 years, you have hit on heavy bag 365,000 times. Comparing to an average street guy who may not even hit on heavy bag at all, if you still lose a fight against this guy, you should get a rope, find a quite place, and hang yourself.


Hitting that heavy bag - even hitting it well - doesn't mean you can hit a moving target. It probably means you can hit with some power (we're assuming some decent practice here), so if you connect, you'll probably have an effect. It also doesn't help with toughening the reaction to getting hit, so if the other guy gets his shot in first (heavy bag does nothing to teach set-up to get a hit in), he may gain a big advantage. I'd trade about 250,000 of those heavy bag hits for at least monthly sparring.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> small weak uncoordinated people


Argumentum ad absurdum. Nobody said small, weak, and uncoordinated - except you.


----------



## jobo (Jan 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Argumentum ad absurdum. Nobody said small, weak, and uncoordinated - except you.


He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are  NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ? 

perhaps if people accurate ly described the attributes of the people they think they can defend against rather than wishy washy, vague streey thug stereo types that have no bearing on reality I wouldn't have to do my mind reading act, ?


----------



## jobo (Jan 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Argumentum ad absurdum. Nobody said small, weak, and uncoordinated - except you.


He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are  NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ? 

perhaps if people accurate ly described the attributes of the people they think they can defend against rather than wishy washy, vague streey thug stereo types that have no bearing on reality I wouldn't have to do my mind reading act, ?


----------



## Gweilo (Jan 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are  NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ?
> 
> perhaps if people accurate ly described the attributes of the people they think they can defend against rather than wishy washy, vague streey thug stereo types that have no bearing on reality I wouldn't have to do my mind reading act, ?



Somebodys tired


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are  NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ?



Because people only exist in those two extremes. All the people in the middle (which is actually the vast majority of the world) don't exist, to your mind?


----------



## jobo (Jan 24, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Because people only exist in those two extremes. All the people in the middle (which is actually the vast majority of the world) don't exist, to your mind?


that's a straw man, as it clearly not what I just said and you quoted, I identified that these terms that people throw about , like strength and fitness and co ordination, are relative terms that only mean anything in comparison to someone else.

now you happen to know what the mean strength for all the " pepole in the world is, then t put it up,

 but it's largely irrelevant, as it will contain lots of women and children and old folks. that are unlikely to attack you, we are only really interested in the strength of healthy adult males, who are far more likely to attack than some elderly chap with chronic asthma or some middle aged account ant who play golf.

but the only comparison that actual matters is between you and your attacker , if he is stronger than you , you are weak, if your faster than him he is slow,.

it makes a certain amount of Sence if your preparing for an attack, to not to assume that the person will be physically inferior to you and lacking in  athletic ability like speed and reactions and co ordinated movement


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 24, 2019)

jobo said:


> that's a straw man, as it clearly not what I just said and you quoted



Actually, it is *exactly* what you said. Here. I'll quote it again.


> He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ?



There. See where you say it? Anyone who isn't big, strong and well coordinated is, according to you, by definition, small weak and unco ordinated [sic]. It's a silly think to think, but it *is* what you said.
If that isn't what you meant, well, it's not my fault you can't express yourself clearly. 
Perhaps you'd like to retract the statement and try to write what you really mean?


----------



## jobo (Jan 24, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Actually, it is *exactly* what you said. Here. I'll quote it again.
> 
> 
> There. See where you say it? Anyone who isn't big, strong and well coordinated is, according to you, by definition, small weak and unco ordinated [sic]. It's a silly think to think, but it *is* what you said.
> ...


I think you need some new reading glasses, I said " relatively speaking"


----------



## KPM (Jan 25, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think this is the key point for discussion, really. If you can't make the system (not necessarily individual techniques) work in some kind of relatively open sparring, it probably has issues - or you do. That's no guarantee it's going to be useful in any given defensive situation, but the odds are better if it works in sparring. And there's really only one way to know that answer.



Exactly!   And why Jobo has chosen to turn this whole thing into an argument about anything but the central point I have been trying to make is beyond me!  Maybe he just likes to argue?


----------



## KPM (Jan 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> He said he was just as likely to be fighting people who are  NOT big strong and well co ordinated, and that makes them small weak and unco ordinated, relatively speaking, doesn't it ?
> 
> perhaps if people accurate ly described the attributes of the people they think they can defend against rather than wishy washy, vague streey thug stereo types that have no bearing on reality I wouldn't have to do my mind reading act, ?



Here is what I ACTUALLY said:

*The typical attacker on the street may have malicious intent, but is most likely not a skilled fighter. They are typically expecting an easy target, not someone that is going to fight back....and certainly not someone who is a martial artist. So if you survive that initial attack and end up in more of "squared off to fight" situation, chances are you will be facing someone less skilled than you and that will be taken by surprise BY YOU, because they will not be expecting you to put up any kind of real fight. So in some respects, once you overcome the fear and nerves and survive what was likely a surprise attack or sucker punch, this should be easier than facing a skilled competitor that knows your style and is expecting you to "bring it." So if you can't make your martial are work in a hard sparring or competition situation, how do you expect to make it work on the street?*

Notice the words "most likely" and "chances are"?   I still maintain that the average attacker on the street is NOT your "big bloke" and likely does not have much training or real skill at fighting.  Now, contrary to your conclusion, that does NOT mean that they will be "small, weak and uncoordinated."  And it also does not mean that encountering your "big bloke" is not possible, just not typical!  You are the one creating strawman arguments here!


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

KPM said:


> Here is what I ACTUALLY said:
> 
> *The typical attacker on the street may have malicious intent, but is most likely not a skilled fighter. They are typically expecting an easy target, not someone that is going to fight back....and certainly not someone who is a martial artist. So if you survive that initial attack and end up in more of "squared off to fight" situation, chances are you will be facing someone less skilled than you and that will be taken by surprise BY YOU, because they will not be expecting you to put up any kind of real fight. So in some respects, once you overcome the fear and nerves and survive what was likely a surprise attack or sucker punch, this should be easier than facing a skilled competitor that knows your style and is expecting you to "bring it." So if you can't make your martial are work in a hard sparring or competition situation, how do you expect to make it work on the street?*
> 
> Notice the words "most likely" and "chances are"?   I still maintain that the average attacker on the street is NOT your "big bloke" and likely does not have much training or real skill at fighting.  Now, contrary to your conclusion, that does NOT mean that they will be "small, weak and uncoordinated."  And it also does not mean that encountering your "big bloke" is not possible, just not typical!  You are the one creating strawman arguments here!


Well what dies " most likely" and chances are mean ? Its Its clear your sugesting that a high % of people who night attack you are not big and have no diserabable fighting skills, and I think that is over optimistic in the extreme. And certainly not an assumption id like to base my self defence strategy and hence my life on.

I'm getting the imprestion that you haven't had a lot of " street fights " and have no measure even a subjective one, to base your assesment of your relative fighting skills against those of an experienced street brawler.  Rather you've bought ibto the common ma delusion, that your skills will top the athletic ability if attackers and even worse than that , you've convinced yourself, that their athelitc abilities will be very low.


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

KPM said:


> Exactly!   And why Jobo has chosen to turn this whole thing into an argument about anything but the central point I have been trying to make is beyond me!  Maybe he just likes to argue?


I'm trying to make what I believe to be a valid point, but not one a lot of ma. Want to hear as it shatters their illusion s,

No one is debating that sparing is better than not sparring, but its actual real life indication of if your mastered a technique to make it work ibmb the real world, is totally dependent on who you are sparring against, a closed shop of people who have learnt the same technique from the same instucter and only practise on each other is likely to lead to delusions of competancy.

For instance I can easily beat every one at my karate class including two of the instructors, (with the notable exception of floyd who is built like a middle weight boxer, becouse he is a middle weight boxer) just using street fighting techniques I learnt in my teenaged years when I was in a lot of fight, and the fact that I'm strong and fast, if some of them gave up a night of karate to go weight training or play soccer they might be more of a challenge

I could take that to mean I'm a good fighter, but I know the truth that a 25 yo me would easily beat me up, because he was stronger and faster, and there fore there's a very good chance that any strong fast 25 yo with basic skills could do the same.


----------



## Gweilo (Jan 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> I'm getting the imprestion that you haven't had a lot of " street fights " and have no measure even a subjective one, to base your assesment of your relative fighting skills against those of an experienced street brawler. Rather you've bought ibto the common ma delusion, that your skills will top the athletic ability if attackers and even worse than that , you've convinced yourself, that their athelitc abilities will be very low.



Whilst it is true there are some experienced street brawlers out there, the vast % of attacks are from drunken wanna be's, or an incident of crime, both probably not very skillful, or oportunists, preying on someone they perceive to be weeker.


----------



## Gweilo (Jan 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> I could take that to mean I'm a good fighter, but I know the truth that a 25 yo me would easily beat me up, because he was stronger and faster, and there fore there's a very good chance that any strong fast 25 yo with basic skills could do the same.



I think that says more about yourself than MA


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Whilst it is true there are some experienced street brawlers out there, the vast % of attacks are from drunken wanna be's, or an incident of crime, both probably not very skillful, or oportunists, preying on someone they perceive to be weeker.


I dealt with the fact, that drunks are commonly delusion and are only really a problem if there's a few of them.
But there's a very good chance the predator is correct in his assumption ,


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Whilst it is true there are some experienced street brawlers out there, the vast % of attacks are from drunken wanna be's, or an incident of crime, both probably not very skillful, or oportunists, preying on someone they perceive to be weeker.


I dealt with the fact, that drunks are commonly delusion and are only really a problem if there's a few of them.
But there's a very good chance the predator is correct in his assumption ,  and we are still getting this " not very skilled" he doesn't need to be very skilled, just very good at a few simple techneques


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Whilst it is true there are some experienced street brawlers out there, the vast % of attacks are from drunken wanna be's, or an incident of crime, both probably not very skillful, or oportunists, preying on someone they perceive to be weeker.


I dealt with the fact, that drunks are commonly delusion and are only really a problem if there's a few of them.
But there's a very good chance the predator is correct in his assumption ,  and we are still getting this " not very skilled" he doesn't need to be very skilled, just very good at a few simple techneques


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> he doesn't need to be very skilled, just very good at a few simple techneques


You can also assume that you are "very good at a few simple techniques". This is why you train MA for. If your toes push kick (simple technique) can stop all attackers, nobody can punch you. It's the one technique that you can use it to deal with all punches (leg is longer than the arm).


----------



## jobo (Jan 25, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can also assume that you are "very good at a few simple techniques". This is why you train MA for. If your toes push kick (simple technique) can stop all attackers, nobody can punch you. It's the one technique that you can use it to deal with all punches (leg is longer than the arm).


hmm, I not sure the first couple are stoppers, they can and will just keep coming, and I'd be very wary of holding my leg up high like the last couple, it's just begging to be grabbed, get away with it once maybe, the second time he will have it


----------



## geezer (Jan 25, 2019)

jobo said:


> hmm, I not sure the first couple are stoppers, they can and will just keep coming, and I'd be very wary of holding my leg up high like the last couple, it's just begging to be grabbed, get away with it once maybe, the second time he will have it



I gave John's video a "like". Against a boxer, I like the idea of jamming the lead leg with a sharp kick to the knee or shin. It doesn't have to do a lot of damage. I like it as a way to keep distance, rob power from the incoming punch, and as a distraction to get your attacker to look down or drop his hands and create an opening.

Sure, it's not going to work the same against a grappler... different body geometry. And like you say, that higher kick to the gut would just be a gift.


----------



## KPM (Jan 25, 2019)

*I'm getting the imprestion that you haven't had a lot of " street fights " *

----And I'm getting the definite impression that you simply like to  argue.


----------



## Gweilo (Jan 26, 2019)

KPM said:


> *I'm getting the imprestion that you haven't had a lot of " street fights " *
> 
> ----And I'm getting the definite impression that you simply like to  argue.



Passionately discuss


----------



## jobo (Jan 26, 2019)

geezer said:


> I gave John's video a "like". Against a boxer, I like the idea of jamming the lead leg with a sharp kick to the knee or shin. It doesn't have to do a lot of damage. I like it as a way to keep distance, rob power from the incoming punch, and as a distraction to get your attacker to look down or drop his hands and create an opening.
> 
> Sure, it's not going to work the same against a grappler... different body geometry. And like you say, that higher kick to the gut would just be a gift.


its one of them co operating partner techniques, look at it again, the attacker is planting his lead leg and bending it to throw a punch when he is out of range to make that punch, it's going to have to be done when the puncher is in range or he isn't going to present his leg in that manner, which negated the stop them getting in range claim,
. second that planted bent leg is not a natural motion out ,t side of ma really outside of eastern ma and not what is likely in a street attack, if you try to trap a straight leg in that manner, he will just step forward with the back leg and be well with in range

I'd happily trade a kick in the shin with a training shoe for the chance of hitting with a right cross,


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2019)

jobo said:


> its one of them co operating partner techniques, look at it again, the attacker is planting his lead leg and bending it to throw a punch when he is out of range to make that punch, it's going to have to be done when the puncher is in range or he isn't going to present his leg in that manner, which negated the stop them getting in range claim,
> . second that planted bent leg is not a natural motion out ,t side of ma really outside of eastern ma and not what is likely in a street attack, if you try to trap a straight leg in that manner, he will just step forward with the back leg and be well with in range
> 
> I'd happily trade a kick in the shin with a training shoe for the chance of hitting with a right cross,


Depending how it's used, that kick can have a number of effects. Used early, it stops that foot from planting where it's expected, which takes them a bit off balance (if you're extraordinarily lucky, it takes them a lot off balance), which makes a step-through cross unlikely. Used with some force, even a bit late, it pushes the knee back, which again changes their balance, making the step-through less likely. If someone is familiar with the kick, they can manage to step through it, but most folks won't be.

Of course, miss the kick, and you're standing there for that cross. I tend to use it when folks are entering/closing to punching range (rather than during the punch), because the penalty for it missing or not working is much smaller.


----------



## jobo (Jan 26, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Depending how it's used, that kick can have a number of effects. Used early, it stops that foot from planting where it's expected, which takes them a bit off balance (if you're extraordinarily lucky, it takes them a lot off balance), which makes a step-through cross unlikely. Used with some force, even a bit late, it pushes the knee back, which again changes their balance, making the step-through less likely. If someone is familiar with the kick, they can manage to step through it, but most folks won't be.
> 
> Of course, miss the kick, and you're standing there for that cross. I tend to use it when folks are entering/closing to punching range (rather than during the punch), because the penalty for it missing or not working is much smaller.


my comments related to how that kick was described and demonstrated in the vid and the use described, all of which have significant practicality issue, if you have a vid if a dis similar application as you describe we can discuss that


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2019)

jobo said:


> my comments related to how that kick was described and demonstrated in the vid and the use described, all of which have significant practicality issue, if you have a vid if a dis similar application as you describe we can discuss that


----------



## jobo (Jan 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


>





drop bear said:


>


which really goes to show how hard it is to catch a kick whilst wearing boxing gloves


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2019)

jobo said:


> which really goes to show how hard it is to catch a kick whilst wearing boxing gloves


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


>


What qualifies a kick as a teep? I've never quite wrapped my head around the term.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2019)

drop bear said:


>


That's some sweet sweeps, that is.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What qualifies a kick as a teep? I've never quite wrapped my head around the term.



It is kind of a front kick of the front leg. But really would be any sort of snappy stop kick. So sometimes they are back foot and sometimes they are a bit of a side kick.


----------



## Gweilo (Jan 27, 2019)

jobo said:


> which really goes to show how hard it is to catch a kick whilst wearing boxing gloves



I have to agree with you, these kicks are good if your opponent is not moving


----------



## jobo (Jan 27, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> I have to agree with you, these kicks are good if your opponent is not moving


those s kicks are to fast and to hard to do any thing against them, if one hits you your going over


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 27, 2019)

drop bear said:


> It is kind of a front kick of the front leg. But really would be any sort of snappy stop kick. So sometimes they are back foot and sometimes they are a bit of a side kick.


So, basically a kick used to stop/push, rather than do damage?


----------



## Danny T (Jan 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What qualifies a kick as a teep? I've never quite wrapped my head around the term.


In Muay Thai today the term 'teep' is generic for any straight forward kick with either of the legs.
Teep literally means 'push'.
There are numerous variations of what everyone today calls the 'teep'
The Push Teep
The Jab Teep
The Slapping Teep
The Side Teep
The Stop Kick Teep
The Thrusting Teep


----------



## drop bear (Jan 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So, basically a kick used to stop/push, rather than do damage?



Yeah.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Jan 28, 2019)

A front push kick is definitely a valid technique to maintain space and jam an opponent who wants to step in and punch you, but then what? You prevented them from entering striking range but you haven't really attacked them. Repeat that move a couple times and he will get wise to it, step around it, downward block it, or even grab it. A front kick that hangs out one millisecond too long is a gift wrapped single leg takedown for a wrestler. So a valid entry, but just one tool among a whole set of tools you would need.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2019)

PiedmontChun said:


> step around it, downward block it, or even grab it. ...


1. Step around it - foot sweep him - bend your leg to escape - ...
2. Downward block it - face punch him - dodge his punch - ...
3. Grab it - hammer fist on the back of his head - deflect his punch - ...

In MA, there are many "door opening moves" (such as the "low front kick"). It's not a finish move. It just start the game.

The "low front kick" is like the 1st move of your chess game. You don't checkmate your opponent on your 1st move.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2019)

In wrestling, the "leg spring:" is one of the door opening moves. When you spring your opponent's leg, your opponent can

- resist, or
- yield,

you can then respond to his respond.


----------



## Anttonyt (Feb 10, 2019)

I have a kung fu bible and posting to see if anyone can let me know a value, it's ving tsun bible by Grand master Ip Ching  Thanks


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 10, 2019)

Anttonyt said:


> I have a kung fu bible and posting to see if anyone can let me know a value, it's ving tsun bible by Grand master Ip Ching  Thanks



you should start a new thread about your topic instead of adding it to this one.


----------



## geezer (Feb 11, 2019)

Anttonyt said:


> I have a kung fu bible and posting to see if anyone can let me know a value, it's ving tsun bible by Grand master Ip Ching  Thanks



Another thing-- if you start a new thread with a good subject line, you can target your audience and be more likely to get a useful response. Oh and BTW, no, I don't know the market value of that book. Do you train Wing Chun or just happen to have the book?


----------



## yak sao (Feb 12, 2019)

I'm just glad somebody's posting something . I'm tempted to put my grocery list on here. Maybe we can get a debate going on which brand of peas is best.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2019)

yak sao said:


> I'm just glad somebody's posting something . I'm tempted to put my grocery list on here. Maybe we can get a debate going on which brand of peas is best.


Peas suck. You just don't know that because you've never properly eaten string beans.


----------



## yak sao (Feb 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Peas suck. You just don't know that because you've never properly eaten string beans.



And so it begins.
You've obviously never been exposed to quality peas.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2019)

yak sao said:


> And so it begins.
> You've obviously never been exposed to quality peas.


There's no such thing as "quality peas". Peas are just beans that didn't learn the whole system.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 12, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Peas suck. You just don't know that because you've never properly eaten string beans.


Frozen peas make a good cold pack for bruises and sprains. Other than that I agree.


----------



## yak sao (Feb 12, 2019)

Man, this turned ugly quicker than I thought it would.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 12, 2019)

my peas are the only true peas and....oh...you get the point... hahahahaha


----------



## Martial D (Feb 12, 2019)

Korea invented peas first.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2019)

wckf92 said:


> my peas are the only true peas and....oh...you get the point... hahahahaha


You don't even really know what peas are. Yeah, those things you think are peas are green and LOOK like peas, but they lack the fundamentals of actual peas.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Feb 12, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Korea invented peas first.


I'm going to need to see an old, badly translated korean manuscript on the origin of peas for proof.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 12, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I'm going to need to see an old, badly translated korean manuscript on the origin of peas for proof.







 You can clearly see in this photo that Korean noodles do not contain peas. People have been claiming this, but it is not true. Peas have never been part of Korean noodles.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 12, 2019)

I pee every day.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Feb 25, 2019)

Yes but.... Peas are great but modern times have shown us that beans are in fact necessary as well. If you aren't eating beans in addition to your peas, then your diet is just incomplete.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 25, 2019)

PiedmontChun said:


> Yes but.... Peas are great but modern times have shown us that beans are in fact necessary as well. If you aren't eating beans in addition to your peas, then your diet is just incomplete.


There is a long history of eating peas. If peas weren't good enough, people wouldn't have kept eating them. Just because you can't subsist on peas, that doesn't mean people who truly understand how to eat them can't. The problem is you, not the peas.


----------



## Highlander (Apr 26, 2019)

geezer said:


> When you spar, especially if you spar against other styles, do you adjust or modify your guard and techniques or do you work from the classical back-weighted stance, facing your opponent squarely with hands held in a man-wu-sau position extending out from center-line?
> 
> And how do you move? Are you constantly moving and evasive or do you try to find or create an opening and explode straight forward?


First off. I didnt read most of this thread.
But as far as modifying the system goes... no. I don't modify it. At least not in the traditional sense. I dont actively try and do things differently, in fact I dont actively try and do anything. I just do things. When training forms and drills you're trying to get the movement as perfect as possible. But when sparring you need to let the movement be free and unrestricted.
My sifu said this the other day and it really stuck in my hand. 


"Dont train to be like Wing Tsun. Train to make Wing Tsun be like you"


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 27, 2019)

Highlander said:


> First off. I didnt read most of this thread.
> But as far as modifying the system goes... no. I don't modify it. At least not in the traditional sense. I dont actively try and do things differently, in fact I dont actively try and do anything. I just do things. When training forms and drills you're trying to get the movement as perfect as possible. But when sparring you need to let the movement be free and unrestricted.
> My sifu said this the other day and it really stuck in my hand.
> 
> ...


I hope you at least read the important discussion of the value of peas vs. beans.


----------



## yak sao (Apr 27, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I hope you at least read the important discussion of the value of peas vs. beans.



Not everyone appreciates the in-depth conversations that take place here.


----------



## Highlander (Apr 28, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I hope you at least read the important discussion of the value of peas vs. beans.


I did caught that part... really hit home. So much knowledge to be shared here


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jun 21, 2019)

Thats a really good question, Let me see if i can find something that can kinda illustrates what im saying. But usually if its a sparring match with someone thats not trying to do chi sau. I change it up. I use my two wu sau gaurds up, and take a side stance. Now depending on your opponent. I would suggest freely moving. If your opponent is not with in arm bridge range no need to start setting up your chi sau reflexes. 

I usually want to attack first to gain entry and control. So i walk up to opponent with my gaurds out. But i dont hold my guards stagnant, i move them back and forth to keep my opponent looking at them into get into range. The moving of the guards back and forth serves as distance manipulator. Once i am in striking range i start kicking while gaining a bridge by punching right down the middle if my opponent uses an arm to stop my punch i utilize chi sau sensitivity.  If im wearing mma gloves i can grab his hard an lop da or jut day or pak da if he has guards out. While kicking his shins or knee below. If i think he might try to keep moving back i step on his foot and hold him there while striking. This strategy works for a non-aggressive opponent who is waiting back trying to time openings. I walk in slowly and calmly while rotating guard positions to keep my hands fluid but still guarding the center line. So if they try to give me a sneak attack i can intercept you need reflex time to in order to lift the knee for kicks or to pak or bil a jab or straight cross or intercept a hook.

There are three methods i utilize for gaining entry.

1. Common method walk in slowly to anticipate sneak attacks or sudden change in the oppoents guard or range or level.

2.  If its smaller weaker opponent i rush fast with power and either slam their guards or kick their stance and start attacking and from there i set up bui ma, if they try to evade me or stomp the foot and hold them there unleashing elbows and punches and deflecting any return attacks, at this range i want to do more controlling their arms too

3. Friendly sparring match with friends with light contact, i wait for my friend to walk in and then i intercept or redirect and work more so on defending while trading techniques with one another.

Once our arm bridges clash is when i sink my chi, and make sure i utilize my wing chun footwork with my strikes. Moving the body as one. I wasn't able to find this video i was thinking of. But there are few guys out there that kinda of convey the first two. I dont recommend 3 unless its your friend or your sparring with your sifu...the third is only for learning purposes imho. If your trying to learn or trade techniques in a friendly matter but waiting for your opponent to attack you sets up stagnation and makes it harder for you to gain control because you start out on the Defensive. An then from there your trying to defend your way to being able to attack finally. 

I have two videos below check them out









Check out the second video too





geezer said:


> When you spar, especially if you spar against other styles, do you adjust or modify your guard and techniques or do you work from the classical back-weighted stance, facing your opponent squarely with hands held in a man-wu-sau position extending out from center-line?
> 
> And how do you move? Are you constantly moving and evasive or do you try to find or create an opening and explode straight forward?




THERE ARE MORE VIDEOS I SEEN BUT THESE VIDEOS HAVE A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE HIGHLIGHTING THEIR DIFFERENT LINEAGES. i think this is a good way to show case different ways of gaining entry and sparring with wing chun. Not the video i wanted but its good to look at both and dissect it.


----------



## Gweilo (Jun 21, 2019)

Yoshiyahu said:


> I usually want to attack first to gain entry and control. So i walk up to opponent with my gaurds out. But i dont hold my guards stagnant, i move them back and forth to keep my opponent looking at them into get into range. The moving of the guards back and forth serves as distance manipulator. Once i am in striking range i start kicking while gaining a bridge by punching right down the middle



Seems like a lot of straight lines and linear movement, what if you meet a counter attacker, who moves in a non linear way?


----------



## Martial D (Jun 21, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Seems like a lot of straight lines and linear movement, what if you meet a counter attacker, who moves in a non linear way?


There's a lot of videos on that too. They are generally quite short.


----------



## Gweilo (Jun 21, 2019)

Not being profitiant in WC, is the art not based on parrying or deflecting attacks, using techniques like bill sao, gum sao, etc ?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jun 22, 2019)

I free flow, stick close if possible and continuous strike them with what ever range their in. I can also play the counter game too. But its boring to me. I like to brawl. Basically if a person is a counter fighter, I use grabbing arm techniques to strike simultaneously. I also when close enough i step on the opponents toe if they are a person who likes to move in and out position. If i use stillness with a overly mobile opponent i wait for him to get into kicking range and i stomp kick his leg or check kick his shins while i use pak da consistently to clear his defenses as i strike simultaneously i may combine the use of lop da and jut da while kicking low to unsteady his balance. If he is too eager and shoots in i side step to sweet his front leg and attempt a closeline techinque. Its many variables. But this is what has worked against non-wing chun guys. Since that is all i had to spar in my town. I trained privately so i was never part of a big school my sparring buddies were boxers, kick boxers, TKD and muai thai guys when i was teen. I only had one friend who did wing chun and i brought him in with me.


When you fight eventually you have move in linear. Even Baquazhang guys have to fight linear. An if your trying to walk in a circle around me it leaves you open. When i attack its not going to be a single one handed attack im attacking with both hands. I striking and defending at the same time as entry technique bil da or pak da or jut da. An then once i gain contact you strike i intercept i begin to control you so you can't back out. I want to jam your space by causing you to play my game there you being pumpled with punches and kicks and arm grabs to stop you from moving if i dont want you too. Circular fighters are slower because they are using a straight line of attack. I experienced my first circular fighter when i had six months of wing chun. An it wasnt good, but after that i analyzed what i did wrong. I was stagnant i stood there waiting to counter instead of going on the offensive. An because i was sitting there cold waiting for him to feed me something to react. i was always on defensive and never could control him. From then on i stop using that hold stand with your stance an hold your guard out and started just attacking, if you counter, i counter your counter because im sensitive enough to feel your movements when we clinch. We also train outside range too so we practice intercepting from no contact. So our contact reflexes are spot on. Especially since i use to spar with non WC guys every day growing up. None of them wanted to bridge. But once they commit to striking you then there is the bridge. 



Gweilo said:


> Seems like a lot of straight lines and linear movement, what if you meet a counter attacker, who moves in a non linear way?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Jun 22, 2019)

Would you say this is a good video on that









Martial D said:


> There's a lot of videos on that too. They are generally quite short.


----------



## Gweilo (Jun 22, 2019)

Yoshiyahu said:


> When you fight eventually you have move in linear. Even Baquazhang guys have to fight linear. An if your trying to walk in a circle around me it leaves you open.


I enjoyed the video, I liked how the WC guy grew into the fight, and finished it with a nice kick, also how he kept his form. However, in WC there is the common misconception,  that a straight line always beats a curved line, whilst in theory this is true, in practice this only works in certain situations. I found the following short video on YouTube, which demonstrates my point, I would be interested in your opinion on the video, before I ask about the vulnerability of  leg attacks, to the WC guy in your video.


----------



## Martial D (Jun 22, 2019)

Yoshiyahu said:


> Would you say this is a good video on that



Sort of sure. In reverse.

Guy in the gi throws nothing but straight punches down the middle where no-gi guys hands are.  The classic man/wu guard is quite effective if everything comes down the middle, especially if they are the sort of weak arm punches you see in most TMA.


----------



## jobo (Jun 22, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Sort of sure. In reverse.
> 
> Guy in the gi throws nothing but straight punches down the middle where no-gi guys hands are.  The classic man/wu guard is quite effective if everything comes down the middle, especially if they are the sort of weak arm punches you see in most TMA.


Yes, and he ( the karate)is trying to out punch someone with a considerably greater reach, and he going for head kicks which is where his arms are and he has no guard, kick low, bring the hand down and then hit him


----------



## Martial D (Jun 22, 2019)

jobo said:


> Yes, and he ( the karate)is trying to out punch someone with a considerably greater reach, and he going for head kicks which is where his arms are and he has no guard, kick low, bring the hand down and then hit him



Yup. I worked with man/wu guard for thousands of hours, it's just irreparably problematic for dealing with anything that isn't also wing chun. If karate guy had an overhand right or a left hook that might have been a much shorter video.


----------



## geezer (Jun 22, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Yup. I worked with man/wu guard for thousands of hours, it's just irreparably problematic for dealing with anything that isn't also wing chun. If karate guy had an overhand right or a left hook that might have been a much shorter video.



What guard or guards do you use now?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 22, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> I enjoyed the video, I liked how the WC guy grew into the fight, and finished it with a nice kick, also how he kept his form. However, in WC there is the common misconception,  that a straight line always beats a curved line, whilst in theory this is true, in practice this only works in certain situations. I found the following short video on YouTube, which demonstrates my point, I would be interested in your opinion on the video, before I ask about the vulnerability of  leg attacks, to the WC guy in your video.


I notice the boxer has several inches of reach on the wing Chun guy.  Even if their respective skill levels are equal, that reach gives the boxer a critical advantage.  The video really shows nothing decisive.


----------



## Gweilo (Jun 23, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I notice the boxer has several inches of reach on the wing Chun guy.  Even if their respective skill levels are equal, that reach gives the boxer a critical advantage.  The video really shows nothing decisive.


I think by your own admission,  " that reach gives the boxer a critical advantage" in this situation it did show something desisive. WC is  excellent at close quarter fighting but can struggle with distance and non linear fighters, the video I posted was not to rubbish WC, but in response to Yoshiyahu's post, about he would back his opponent up, take control, or step on his opponents foot, how would a WC practioner achieve that against the boxer in the video, I would not of thought a good WC fighter would loose to every fighter who had a reach advantage, and countered with a curved over the top strike.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 23, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> I think by your own admission,  " that reach gives the boxer a critical advantage" in this situation it did show something desisive. WC is  excellent at close quarter fighting but can struggle with distance and non linear fighters, the video I posted was not to rubbish WC, but in response to Yoshiyahu's post, about he would back his opponent up, take control, or step on his opponents foot, how would a WC practioner achieve that against the boxer in the video, I would not of thought a good WC fighter would loose to every fighter who had a reach advantage, and countered with a curved over the top strike.


I don’t feel it showed anything with regard to boxing vs. wing Chun.  It showed a fellow with a serious reach advantage can have an easier time of it.  It showed a match between two people and does not indicate anything of boxing vs. wing Chun. This is one example only, not any kind of sample from which to extract further meaning.

I don’t feel wing Chun struggles outside of short range.  I have never really understood how people even define short vs. long range in terms of hand techniques.  Everyone has a limit to their reach, that much is true and is defined by their body size.  But beyond that, technique is technique.


----------



## jobo (Jun 23, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I don’t feel it showed anything with regard to boxing vs. wing Chun.  It showed a fellow with a serious reach advantage can have an easier time of it.  It showed a match between two people and does not indicate anything of boxing vs. wing Chun. This is one example only, not any kind of sample from which to extract further meaning.
> 
> I don’t feel wing Chun struggles outside of short range.  I have never really understood how people even define short vs. long range in terms of hand techniques.  Everyone has a limit to their reach, that much is true and is defined by their body size.  But beyond that, technique is technique.


most of these wc against xxx contests seem to have the wing chun guy at a size, weight, age didadvantage, on of the few exceptions being the vid above where the wc guy did well against a karate man,,
but all else being equal, you not going to win a punching match with a boxer, boxing has spent the last hundred years or so developing its technueqes, expecting an art that's stuck in the 1920s or when ever to come out on top is deluded. just as your not going to win a kicking match with a tkd man or a grappling contest with a wrestler, and that's equally true of quite a few arts

knocking over drunks or idiots however is well with in its remit


----------



## Martial D (Jun 23, 2019)

geezer said:


> What guard or guards do you use now?


I like to keep my hands in cover, ie; back hand beside the jaw, forward hand 6 inches or so forward and to the side of the other jaw.(boxers guard).

This way I am covered if I don't happen to be so fast I can react and move my arms for every punch(which is never), but I can still use my WC repertoire (pac/tan/stick/etc) with no real drawbacks.


----------

