# Recent Video by Alan Orr



## geezer

This is one of a couple of videos dealing with "force flow" in chi-sau Alan Orr posted on Youtube a few weeks back. What do you think?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

I'm new to WT, but speaking as a grappler what he is showing makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## wckf92

Thx for sharing. I disagree with his "if I step while under pressure I release my structural control" bit. I could be misunderstanding him/his demo; but if you know how to step, the footwork angle, combined with concepts of 2nd form...then stepping while under pressure when done correctly can be tactically advantageous. Secondly, by releasing pressure with proper footwork, you are essentially complying with not fighting force with force. 

Is this the kind of stuff he is learning from Chu who is learning it from Hendrik?


----------



## ShawnP

look to me like basic Aikido practices, we used this daily by practicing redirecting the opponents forward force to the side.


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> This is one of a couple of videos dealing with "force flow" in chi-sau Alan Orr posted on Youtube a few weeks back. What do you think?



Don't know what it is supposed to be developing. I asked Alan but he didn't want to reply.


----------



## Xue Sheng

wckf92 said:


> Is this the kind of stuff he is learning from Chu who is learning it from Hendrik?



Alan Orr has trained Wing Chun, Brazilian Jui-Jitsu and Eskrima, that is likely where it all comes from.

Chu learned from "you know who"!? From what little I know of Chu I find that hard to believe


----------



## ShawnP

Xue Sheng said:


> Chu learned from "you know who"!?


i dont know who, is his name taboo and not to be mentioned here?


----------



## Marnetmar

ShawnP said:


> i dont know who, is his name taboo and not to be mentioned here?



No, Hendrik is just the butt of a lot of jokes for going on long rambles about Yik Kam WC that don't ever go anywhere.


----------



## dudewingchun

Xue Sheng said:


> Alan Orr has trained Wing Chun, Brazilian Jui-Jitsu and Eskrima, that is likely where it all comes from.
> 
> Chu learned from "you know who"!? From what little I know of Chu I find that hard to believe



Robert Chu is good friends with Hendrik.


----------



## guy b.

Xue Sheng said:


> Alan Orr has trained Wing Chun, Brazilian Jui-Jitsu and Eskrima, that is likely where it all comes from



I have trained VT and BJJ. Still don't understand what this is supposed to develop. Is it something to do with Escrima?


----------



## Xue Sheng

ShawnP said:


> i dont know who, is his name taboo and not to be mentioned here?



If his name gets mentioned to much he might be back... and we don't need that again..... lets just say it begins with an H and ends with a K



Marnetmar said:


> No, Hendrik is just the butt of a lot of jokes for going on long rambles about Yik Kam WC that don't ever go anywhere.



shhh....don't keep saying that name...... 



dudewingchun said:


> Robert Chu is good friends with Hendrik.



Did not know that



guy b. said:


> I have trained VT and BJJ. Still don't understand what this is supposed to develop. Is it something to do with Escrima?



I have no idea either, but it looks to me as something similar to what we do in taiji, just using way to much force


----------



## wckf92

guy b. said:


> I have trained VT and BJJ. Still don't understand what this is supposed to develop. Is it something to do with Escrima?



I'm guessing it's something he (Alan) learned from either Hendrik and/or Chu. This has all the indications of Hendriks secret kool aid recipe. Yawn...


----------



## wtxs

Xue Sheng said:


> If his name gets mentioned to much he might be back... and we don't need that again..... _*lets just say it begins with an H and ends with a K*_



You left out and F - in case you don't know, HKF stands for Hong Kong Fooey


----------



## Xue Sheng

Can't e just play it safe and refer to him as "He who shall not be named"


----------



## dudewingchun

Im fairly confident that Alan would wipe the floor with all of you. I dont know Hendrik but its obvious he has aspergers or something like that.. so keep that in mind.


----------



## geezer

dudewingchun said:


> Im fairly confident that Alan would wipe the floor with all of you. I dont know Hendrik but its obvious he has aspergers or something like that.. so keep that in mind.



I hadn't thought of the _asbergers_ possibility, but you may be right. As far as Alan Orr goes, I find his stuff pretty impressive. Now that's just based on watching videos of him and his fighters. Oh, and from the input of people like you who have worked with him. Someday I'd like to meet the man in person. 

I don't think the others meant any disrespect. It's just that Hendrick's posts and videos really bring out the _snarky_ side of almost anybody!


----------



## KPM

I disagree with his "if I step while under pressure I release my structural control" bit. I could be misunderstanding him/his demo; but if you know how to step, the footwork angle, combined with concepts of 2nd form...then stepping while under pressure when done correctly can be tactically advantageous. Secondly, by releasing pressure with proper footwork, you are essentially complying with not fighting force with force.

---Yes, I think you did misunderstand him.  Or maybe he could have  stated it a bit differently.  I think what he was showing was that if he tries to step while the opponent is affecting his balance too much, then the opponent will just follow him movement and gain the advantage.  I agree that you can step and release pressure  and change the angle so that you let the opponent "over-commit" and he loses his balance.  If you watch the video, you will see Alan doing this a lot.



Is this the kind of stuff he is learning from Chu who is learning it from Hendrik?

---He learned it from Robert Chu, but also directly from Hendrik as well.


----------



## KPM

Xue Sheng said:


> Alan Orr has trained Wing Chun, Brazilian Jui-Jitsu and Eskrima, that is likely where it all comes from.
> 
> Chu learned from "you know who"!? From what little I know of Chu I find that hard to believe



This has nothing to do with BJJ or Escrima.  This is "forceflow", as Alan states at the beginning of the clip.   This is Hendrik's work.


----------



## geezer

KPM said:


> This has nothing to do with BJJ or Escrima.  This is "forceflow", as Alan states at the beginning of the clip.   This is Hendrik's work.



Well it certainly comes across a lot better when Alan _demonstrates _it than trying to listen to Hendrick's explanations!


----------



## KPM

geezer said:


> I hadn't thought of the _asbergers_ possibility, but you may be right. As far as Alan Orr goes, I find his stuff pretty impressive. Now that's just based on watching videos of him and his fighters. Oh, and from the input of people like you who have worked with him. Someday I'd like to meet the man in person.



Ok.  I haven't studied or learned all this "forceflow" stuff.  But I will try to give a little bit of explanation of what is going on here.  Realize that a lot of what Alan is doing is rather subtle movements of his body that are hard to see.  Its something that has to be felt more than explained or seen in a video.   Many people do Chi Sau with just the arms.  They stand perfectly stationary and roll away.  But if you watch Alan you will see that he is using his whole body.  He is never really "standing still."  There are constant shifts in weight and pressure.  He is constantly challenging his opponent's structure and balance.  Watch how he tosses this guy around without taking many steps with his feet.  And this guy is no beginner!   So this is all about learning how to affect an opponent's structure....how to destroy his balance.  If you can do that, then you can pretty much hit him at will!  Or sweep him, grapple him, etc.  In this case Chi Sau is about how to do that...not how to trade shots with various "Chi Sau tricks."   When you watch Alan Chi Sau'ing with someone, what always impresses me is that he never does any complicated technique combinations, no 2 or 3 step set-ups, no "Lat Sau" progressions, etc.  He simply rolls to affect the opponent's structure and balance, and when he breaks that structure or balance an opening is going to appear and he lands relatively simple and straight-forward shots.  He can make seasoned people look like beginners simply because he doesn't let them "get set"....he doesn't let them play any "Chi Sau games"...he puts them off-balance, keeps them off-balance, and hits them pretty much at will! 

From what I gather, because again.. I don't know the "forceflow" that Hendrik has been teaching these guys.....but it seems to me this is really a way to absorb and then redirect the opponent's force....his pressure that he is applying on you.  You absorb it just momentarily and then send it back at him.  There is a "give and take" or an "ebb and flow" if you watch him in the video.  Since his partner cannot control this, he ends up manipulated and bouncing around like a rag doll.

Again, it has nothing to do with Escrima, and is only tangentially related to BJJ.  As Tony pointed out, someone from BJJ will probably recognize similar concepts that they use on the ground....breaking the opponent's base, not letting him get set, etc. 

I think Hendrik has some good stuff.  He just doesn't convey it very well in any of these forums, and is not the most tactful guy when it comes to conversations. 

Anyway, hope that helps someone.


----------



## dudewingchun

geezer said:


> I hadn't thought of the _asbergers_ possibility, but you may be right. As far as Alan Orr goes, I find his stuff pretty impressive. Now that's just based on watching videos of him and his fighters. Oh, and from the input of people like you who have worked with him. Someday I'd like to meet the man in person.
> 
> I don't think the others meant any disrespect. It's just that Hendrick's posts and videos really bring out the _snarky_ side of almost anybody!



Im pretty sure he does have it or something similar. I think Alan has no problems touching hands with anyone in person. So if you are ever in New Zealand go and check him out.


----------



## geezer

I'm not sure why_ Xue_ thought he saw an Escrima influence here. I don't see it. His observation about it being like a very physical _taiji _made more sense.

@_dudewingchun: _Go to New Zealand and meet Alan Orr? If I win the lottery, you can bet I will! There are a few others on that list too.


----------



## JowGaWolf

wckf92 said:


> Thx for sharing. I disagree with his "if I step while under pressure I release my structural control" bit. I could be misunderstanding him/his demo; but if you know how to step, the footwork angle, combined with concepts of 2nd form...then stepping while under pressure when done correctly can be tactically advantageous. Secondly, by releasing pressure with proper footwork, you are essentially complying with not fighting force with force.
> 
> Is this the kind of stuff he is learning from Chu who is learning it from Hendrik?


I was going to say the same thing about stepping back while under pressure. But I think he's only referring to the current position that he's in with someone pushing his upper body.  I can think of numerous reason why someone should be stepping back when dealing with pressure.

The rest is similar to Tai Chi concepts by creating an unstable object to push against.  The only thing I would caution is that this only works when the person is in certain positions. It's not going to work against someone who is attacking the root.  It also won't work against someone who doesn't push beyond their root.  I could push this guy and be fairly safe against his counter so long as I don't push (extend) beyond my root.  The wider my stance is the more stable I'll be and the longer I'll be able to extend my push.  I'm not sure if anyone noticed but he was doing quite a bit of leaning forward.  If Wing Chun is like other kung fu systems then leaning forward is definitely not encouraged.

If someone pushes against me and I catch them leaning against me as a way to resist, then I'll stop pushing and start pulling, as they try to regain their balance from the pull, I'll push again but from a different angle.   But I don't take Wing Chun so I don't know what you guys teach about leaning forward.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Not sure what you are disagreeing to.


----------



## dudewingchun

JowGaWolf said:


> Not sure what you are disagreeing to.



The leaning forward part.


----------



## geezer

JowGaWolf said:


> I'm not sure if anyone noticed but he was doing quite a bit of leaning forward.  If Wing Chun is like other kung fu systems then leaning forward is definitely not encouraged.



Alan Orr has often been criticized for leaning forward into his opponents. He has addressed this in several of his videos and explained that he is not off leaning off balance. I don't know who is right and I have never crossed brigges with the man. That is the only certain way to know.  You really can't judge from how things _look_ on a video. Short of crossing bridges I would prefer to ask the impressions of people who _have_ worked with him and get their opinions.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Folks, Hendrik has been banned. Which means he's not able to defend himself against the things being said about him.
So... maybe we could keep the conversation about the contents of the video, and not about bashing someone who isn't here?


----------



## JowGaWolf

geezer said:


> Alan Orr has often been criticized for leaning forward into his opponents. He has addressed this in several of his videos and explained that he is not off leaning off balance. I don't know who is right and I have never crossed brigges with the man. That is the only certain way to know.  You really can't judge from how things _look_ on a video. Short of crossing bridges I would prefer to ask the impressions of people who _have_ worked with him and get their opinions.


I'm not criticizing. It's an observation and based on your statement I'm not the only one.  
This is the same guy right?  If so he's leaning forward.  In all the videos I saw of him doing Chi-sau




You can see him lean forward here and you can actually see his root give because of it at 0:22 in the video below.





He may not be "off balance" because the other person is pushing back and that's what's holding him up. 
Compared to this, he's leaning forward.  It's just an observation.  which is why I also stated that I don't know how Wing Chun people deal with the issue of leaning forward in their stance.


----------



## dudewingchun

It looks like he is leaning but the mechanics are not leaning. There is a method. Not that keen to try explain on a forum. Getting over forums I would rather just go train and spar. If you do not do wing chun then why are you commenting on a wing chun video about the mechanics ? Just wandering.


----------



## JowGaWolf

I comment because I learn more about my system when I learn about other systems. While I may not understand his leaning I do understand the other stuff he's talking about because it's not unique to Wing Chun


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> So this is all about learning how to affect an opponent's structure....how to destroy his balance.  If you can do that, then you can pretty much hit him at will!  Or sweep him, grapple him, etc.  In this case Chi Sau is about how to do that...not how to trade shots with various "Chi Sau tricks."



How does learning to attack the balance of the opponent in chi sau transfer to fighting? What is this chi sau aimed at developing in terms of fighting?



> From what I gather, because again.. I don't know the "forceflow" that Hendrik has been teaching these guys.....but it seems to me this is really a way to absorb and then redirect the opponent's force....his pressure that he is applying on you.  You absorb it just momentarily and then send it back at him.  There is a "give and take" or an "ebb and flow" if you watch him in the video.  Since his partner cannot control this, he ends up manipulated and bouncing around like a rag doll.



I see that it approaches chi sau as a kind of standing grappling with hitting. This seems to be a literal approach to chi sau, i.e. that chi sau just is what it is training, and the aim is to fight in that way? But then I don't see such a thing in the fights of Alan's people. Shouldn't I be seeing it?



> I think Hendrik has some good stuff.  He just doesn't convey it very well in any of these forums, and is not the most tactful guy when it comes to conversations



So is HS a kind of wing chun genius, developing it himself from core principles? Or is he getting it from another person? On forums he seems to opt for the second choice, but many others seem to argue the point. If he is making it up then fine by me. 

I do think he has a huge problem trying to communicate what his ideas actually are. I actually don't find RC or AO all that much more helpful in explaining. At least AO does post clips and tries to show what HS only talks about, but there is nowhere to ask questions about it and no feedback given. 

I hope that you or dudewingchun can help?


----------



## KPM

JowGaWolf said:


> I comment because I learn more about my system when I learn about other systems. While I may not understand his leaning I do understand the other stuff he's talking about because it's not unique to Wing Chun



It really isn't leaning.  "Leaning" implies that if what you are "leaning" against was suddenly removed, you'd fall down!  That certainly isn't the case!   Wing Chun puts an emphasis on "forward pressure."  You cannot challenge an opponent's balance and structure without putting forward pressure into his structure.  That is what Alan is doing.  It may look like leaning, but if the resistance he is encountering from the opponent is suddenly released, he isn't going off-balance himself....rather he adjusts, takes a step, changes the angle, etc.  There is a "give and take" or "ebb and flow" as I mentioned before.  He never loses his root in any of those videos.  He simply follows the opponent.  Compare what Alan is doing to the video of Ip Chun.  Where do you ever see Ip Chun applying any real forward pressure into his opponent's structure?  Its all arms in that video, and very little body. 

I think it is rather interesting that Wing Chun will talk about the importance of "forward pressure", but think it is only applied with the arms and with a step.  When Alan takes it to the next phase and shows it applied with the whole body, he's accused of "leaning."


----------



## KPM

How does learning to attack the balance of the opponent in chi sau transfer to fighting? What is this chi sau aimed at developing in terms of fighting?

---In this case I think it is about learning to control the opponent from the bridge.  You are already in contact with the opponent in Chi Sau.  So it is about learning how to control the opponent while hitting him after contact is established.  So once a fight enters the "Chi Sau range" and you have established a bridge, these skills of controlling the opponent and breaking his balance and structure to gain the advantage kick in. 



I see that it approaches chi sau as a kind of standing grappling with hitting. This seems to be a literal approach to chi sau, i.e. that chi sau just is what it is training, and the aim is to fight in that way? But then I don't see such a thing in the fights of Alan's people. Shouldn't I be seeing it?

---It's about learning to control while hitting.  That only happens when you have a bridge.  If you don't have a bridge you are just punching or kicking.  In an MMA situation it becomes really hard to establish and maintain that bridge I think.  It happens very briefly.  In a setting where its all about punching and kicking, what you are going to see predominantly is punching and kicking!  But if you see footage of Alan himself sparring with people in the gym...you see a lot more of what is happening in the Chi Sau videos.   I'm sure if we saw footage of WSLVT people in an MMA situation, we wouldn't see anything that looked like the videos that PB puts up either!  



So is HS a kind of wing chun genius, developing it himself from core principles? Or is he getting it from another person? On forums he seems to opt for the second choice, but many others seem to argue the point. If he is making it up then fine by me.

---I'm no expert on Hendrik or how he has learned what he knows.  From my impressions....he has some pretty extensive background of working with good people, has done a lot of research from old sources on his own, and then over the years has brought that together in his own way. 


I do think he has a huge problem trying to communicate what his ideas actually are. I actually don't find RC or AO all that much more helpful in explaining. At least AO does post clips and tries to show what HS only talks about, but there is nowhere to ask questions about it and no feedback given.

---It is  what it is.  I can't explain how other people choose to justify things.  I will say that in the past Alan has spent lots of time on forums trying to explain what he does.  He is now to the point  where he isn't going to waste time on people that don't seem to get it or come across as simply antagonistic.   And this newer forceflow stuff is much harder to explain in a written format anyway.   Alan figures that if someone is truly interested in what he is doing, they will subscribe to his mentorship program where they can see detailed explanations and demonstrations on video and he will answer any questions to the best of his abilities.  Sure he charges money for that, because he has put a lot of time and effort into it.  It really is like attending a seminar with him that never ends.   And people charge for seminars don't they?


----------



## Xue Sheng

I just have to say; Nothing agianst Allen, or what he is doing, because it works, but to be honest he is not really taking anything to the next level, nor has he or Hendrick come up with anything new. What he is doing is done in taijiquan (using a bit less force) all the time. And even then taijiquan got it from the Tao Te Ching where it says "The old hard tree breaks and falls when the wind blows. The young tree bends and does not break"

You will also find it in Baguazhang and even in Xingyiquan


----------



## geezer

KPM said:


> I will say that in the past Alan has spent lots of time on forums trying to explain what he does.  He is now to the point  where he isn't going to waste time on people that don't seem to get it or come across as simply antagonistic.   And this newer forceflow stuff is much harder to explain in a written format anyway.   Alan figures that if someone is truly interested in what he is doing, they will subscribe to his mentorship program where they can see detailed explanations and demonstrations on video and he will answer any questions to the best of his abilities...



I don't blame him a bit for giving up on these forums. And he has posted a ton of free videos explaining his stuff on his Youtube channel.

BTW _Keith_, if the multi-quote function isn't working for you, perhaps you could at least put the quoted sections of your posts in _italics? _It would make keeping track of who's saying what so much easier. At least I would find it helpful!


----------



## JowGaWolf

geezer said:


> I don't blame him a bit for giving up on these forums. And he has posted a ton of free videos explaining his stuff on his Youtube channel.
> 
> BTW _Keith_, if the multi-quote function isn't working for you, perhaps you could at least put the quoted sections of your posts in _italics? _It would make keeping track of who's saying what so much easier. At least I would find it helpful!


  Is "force flow" something new to Wing Chun?


----------



## geezer

JowGaWolf said:


> Is "force flow" something new to Wing Chun?



You'd think it would be at the core of our training. But this is WC. Everybody has different ideas. No two people agree on anything. Heck, I even argue with myself!


----------



## JowGaWolf

geezer said:


> You'd think it would be at the core of our training. But this is WC. Everybody has different ideas. No two people agree on anything. Heck, I even argue with myself!


Yep. That's exactly what I thought it was part of.  I actually thought Chi Sau was the internal exercise that develops a similar ability that Tai chi Chuan develops with the push hands exercise.  And because of that assumption I thought that's why WC uses the small shuffle forward as a way to apply forward pressure, which happens to be similar to how some other kung fu systems apply forward pressure without stepping. 

I guess WC has a lot of internal battles going on.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> In this case I think it is about learning to control the opponent from the bridge.  You are already in contact with the opponent in Chi Sau.  So it is about learning how to control the opponent while hitting him after contact is established.  So once a fight enters the "Chi Sau range" and you have established a bridge, these skills of controlling the opponent and breaking his balance and structure to gain the advantage kick in



This is indeed how it looks. Is it an interpretation of the system you are familiar with?



> It's about learning to control while hitting.  That only happens when you have a bridge.  If you don't have a bridge you are just punching or kicking.



What do you mean by a bridge?



> In an MMA situation it becomes really hard to establish and maintain that bridge I think.  It happens very briefly.  In a setting where its all about punching and kicking, what you are going to see predominantly is punching and kicking!



Isn't fighting predominantly about either punching and kicking or wrestling? I don't see another identifiable movement category in empty handed fighting. Of course wresting can be combined with hitting - this happens in MMA quite a lot.



> But if you see footage of Alan himself sparring with people in the gym...you see a lot more of what is happening in the Chi Sau videos.



Isn't that because they are doing chi sau?



> I'm sure if we saw footage of WSLVT people in an MMA situation, we wouldn't see anything that looked like the videos that PB puts up either!



Poon sau, lap sau and chi sau are training methodologies in WSL VT. They address particular development goals. They aren't fighting methods, so I don't think you would expect to see them in fighting.

If I understand correctly then force flow as shown in Alan's videos appears to be trained in CSL chi sau the way it is intended to be used in reality; as a balance breaking and body controlling skill at close contact while hitting, i.e. a way to mix grappling and hitting?


----------



## KPM

I just have to say; Nothing agianst Allen, or what he is doing, because it works, but to be honest he is not really taking anything to the next level,

---_Sure he is!  At least for Wing Chun.  Watch the videos of Alan compared to that one of Ip Chun and tell me you don't see a difference in how he is moving and controlling his partners/opponents._


 nor has he or Hendrick come up with anything new. What he is doing is done in taijiquan (using a bit less force) all the time. And even then taijiquan got it from the Tao Te Ching where it says "The old hard tree breaks and falls when the wind blows. The young tree bends and does not break"

---_I won't argue with that!  But I'm sure they would say they are doing it in a different way.  Hendrik would say this was how it was done in Wing Chun 100 years ago.  But we have no way to prove that._


----------



## KPM

This is indeed how it looks. Is it an interpretation of the system you are familiar with?

_---Yes, somewhat.  But that is not I how learned it in Pin Sun._



What do you mean by a bridge?

_---Contact with the opponent arm to arm.  Usually at the forearm._ 



Isn't fighting predominantly about either punching and kicking or wrestling? I don't see another identifiable movement category in empty handed fighting. Of course wresting can be combined with hitting - this happens in MMA quite a lot.

---I _guess maybe it lies in the unique way in which Wing Chun can combine grappling (in the sense of controlling the opponent with contact) and hitting._ 



Isn't that because they are doing chi sau?

_---Well, I'm not sure what you mean.  You implied you didn't see what Alan is showing in that video in clips of his guys fighting.  I said you will see elements of it if you saw Alan himself sparring in the gym.   They are doing Chi Sau in that clip in the OP, but not when sparring in the gym._



Poon sau, lap sau and chi sau are training methodologies in WSL VT. They address particular development goals. They aren't fighting methods, so I don't think you would expect to see them in fighting.

_---You would never do a Lop Sau in fighting?  Or deflect something with a Bong Sau when fighting?  Or establish a bridge to work from in fighting?  I'm afraid I don't see how any of that would then transfer to fighting if you don't.  Exactly what are you developing?_


If I understand correctly then force flow as shown in Alan's videos appears to be trained in CSL chi sau the way it is intended to be used in reality; as a balance breaking and body controlling skill at close contact while hitting, i.e. a way to mix grappling and hitting?

_---I think that's a fair statement.  But I would also say that there doesn't have to be as much "controlling while hitting" as Alan is showing in the clip.  I've seen other people that Hendrik has worked with that simply used their "forceflow" methods to "bounce" someone away.   I'll also say that other people that have worked with Hendrik independently of Robert Chu and Alan Orr have said they are not impressed with Alan's "forceflow" skills and think he is still using too much body motion.  I've seen footage of some do "forceflow" and it looked rather "questionable".....meaning you have to wonder how cooperative the partner was being....one of those "flying through the air without explanation" things.  I remain skeptical about that kind of "forceflow."  But what I see Alan doing in the video simply looks to me like good biomechanics._


----------



## Xue Sheng

KPM said:


> ---_Sure he is!  At least for Wing Chun.  Watch the videos of Alan compared to that one of Ip Chun and tell me you don't see a difference in how he is moving and controlling his partners/opponents._



I did watch the video...it is nothing new to me or many in TCMA. As a matter of fact. some of what Alan is doing I have come across in a Wing Chun Sifu in a Yip Man lineage. Nothing against Alan, it is just what I have run into.



KPM said:


> ---_I won't argue with that!  But I'm sure they would say they are doing it in a different way.  Hendrik would say this was how it was done in Wing Chun 100 years ago.  But we have no way to prove that._



Actually I think Hendrick would refuse to answer anything and tell me I need to get a teacher. Or at least that is what he did historically to anyone who asked him questions or dared question him


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

KPM said:


> What do you mean by a bridge?
> 
> _---Contact with the opponent arm to arm.  Usually at the forearm._


Will you consider "leg to leg" as "bridge"?


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _You implied you didn't see what Alan is showing in that video in clips of his guys fighting.  I said you will see elements of it if you saw Alan himself sparring in the gym.   They are doing Chi Sau in that clip in the OP, but not when sparring in the gym._



I just searched "Alan Orr sparring".

I don't see anything he shows in his _chi-sau_ clips in his sparring. All I see is lead feet, overreaching, and getting punched in the face. Where is it?


----------



## dudewingchun

LFJ said:


> I just searched "Alan Orr sparring".
> 
> I don't see anything he shows in his _chi-sau_ clips in his sparring. All I see is lead feet, overreaching, and getting punched in the face. Where is it?



The guy he is sparring with would wipe the floor with you all of you quite easy without a problem , im pretty confident with that statement. I have sparred with him personally. He is an actual professional fighter in kickboxing and mma. The fact that Alan isnt getting murked is good enough for me. Not going to comment on the technique stuff , no point on a forum with people who are actively looking to disprove what he does.


----------



## LFJ

dudewingchun said:


> The guy he is sparring with would wipe the floor with you all of you quite easy without a problem , im pretty confident with that statement. I have sparred with him personally. He is an actual professional fighter in kickboxing and mma. The fact that Alan isnt getting murked is good enough for me. Not going to comment on the technique stuff , no point on a forum with people who are actively looking to disprove what he does.



That's a pretty stupid thing to say. Have you personally sparred everyone on this forum to know how they'd fare? I haven't even met anyone from this forum.

I'm not trying to disprove what Alan does. Just trying to find it in any sort of free sparring or fighting by him or his team. I'm confused as to why it doesn't seem to show up if using it directly is one of their goals.


----------



## guy b.

dudewingchun said:


> The guy he is sparring with would wipe the floor with you all of you quite easy without a problem , im pretty confident with that statement. I have sparred with him personally. He is an actual professional fighter in kickboxing and mma. The fact that Alan isnt getting murked is good enough for me. Not going to comment on the technique stuff , no point on a forum with people who are actively looking to disprove what he does.



I have to agree with LFJ here; that is a bit of a silly thing to say. 

Peter Irving is a low to mid level MMA fighter that doesn't fight much these days. Having experienced sparring with low to mid level British MMA fighters plenty of times from early 2000s to about 2010 I am not sure if he would "wipe the floor" with me or not. I would say that speculation of this type is pointless. I would also say that being ale to win a fight doesn't confer the ability to end all aguments about approaches to wing chun, which is at the end of the day what we are talking about on this forum. He is also Alan's friend and it is not hard sparring- they aren't trying to hurt or dominate each other. 

I'm not going to commment on the sparring clip other than to say that I agree with LFJ that I don't see here what Alan shows in his chi sau clips. When they are grappling they are grappling in a standard wrestling style way; Alan's hips are out, presumably because he will get thrown if he leaves them in like a MT fighter. With hips out like this I don't see how the force flow can work?

I still don't know how the two sides of CSL training link together. I agree that the kickboxing side for MMA has shown results. But where is the other stuff?


----------



## KPM

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Will you consider "leg to leg" as "bridge"?



Yes!


----------



## KPM

dudewingchun said:


> The guy he is sparring with would wipe the floor with you all of you quite easy without a problem , im pretty confident with that statement. I have sparred with him personally. He is an actual professional fighter in kickboxing and mma. The fact that Alan isnt getting murked is good enough for me. Not going to comment on the technique stuff , no point on a forum with people who are actively looking to disprove what he does.



I agree with the "tough opponent" part Sean! 

This is one of Alan's guys training for MMA, so very likely they are focusing on their CSL Boxing skills and specifically working the punching.   LFJ, show us some video of any WSL person doing something like this and we can start taking your critiques seriously.  I have a hard time finding any kind of sparring clips from PB's people or any WSLVT people for that matter.


----------



## Alan Orr

guy b. said:


> I have to agree with LFJ here; that is a bit of a silly thing to say.
> 
> Peter Irving is a low to mid level MMA fighter that doesn't fight much these days. Having experienced sparring with low to mid level British MMA fighters plenty of times from early 2000s to about 2010 I am not sure if he would "wipe the floor" with me or not. I would say that speculation of this type is pointless. I would also say that being ale to win a fight doesn't confer the ability to end all aguments about approaches to wing chun, which is at the end of the day what we are talking about on this forum. He is also Alan's friend and it is not hard sparring- they aren't trying to hurt or dominate each other.
> 
> I'm not going to commment on the sparring clip other than to say that I agree with LFJ that I don't see here what Alan shows in his chi sau clips. When they are grappling they are grappling in a standard wrestling style way; Alan's hips are out, presumably because he will get thrown if he leaves them in like a MT fighter. With hips out like this I don't see how the force flow can work?
> 
> I still don't know how the two sides of CSL training link together. I agree that the kickboxing side for MMA has shown results. But where is the other stuff?



I have no idea why you are so interested in CSL Wing Chun when all you do is guess and give your limited opinion.

Peter Irving is not a low level MMA fighter at all. He is a very well respected fighter and beaten UFC fighters and the Bellator Champ as well has a good Kickboxing record as well. He is a master coach and has taught and trains many of the top fighters coming about now.
Have you sparred with him? I can arrange it for you no problem and you can film it and show us how to deal with him. Let me know and it will happen.

As far as sparring and force flow goes. You do not know what you are looking for so your comments and opinion are just your limited points of view which have no level of meaning. 

Chi Sao is all about control of energy and awareness of pressure control. I have 100s of free clips of my youtube channel and over 900 lessons on my web site. So its not a simple as you seem to think. 
Why do you think one clip on a small area is the whole? Why do you think a clip of live sparring does not show chi sao skills? Sparring will look like sparring. The timing and control of weight position and many more things are all form chi sao training.


----------



## KPM

This is about the closest thing I could find.  Michael Kurth is very good!  But notice that his partner in this pseudo-sparring clip isn't giving him real opposition like the guy in Alan's clip, and that his partner is doing Wing Chun and keeping things nice and tight for him.  No body movement, no real footwork, no wide hard punches, etc.   Do you guys know of any better sparring clip from WSL people?


----------



## Alan Orr

Yes most wing chun 'fighting' clips are just feeder drills. My clips are live training with fighters.


----------



## guy b.

Alan Orr said:


> I have no idea why you are so interested in CSL Wing Chun when all you do is guess and give your limited opinion.



I'm interested because CSL wing chun makes extraordinary claims. Generally I have no problem with what you are doing and I think it is good to see wing chun in MMA. But I don't understand the basis of some of the claims being made, and explanations given are very minimal, or completely incomprehensible when they come from HS. My opinion is of course guided by my experience of wing chun, how else could it be? 



> Peter Irving is not a low level MMA fighter at all. He is a very well respected fighter and beaten UFC fighters and the Bellator Champ as well has a good Kickboxing record as well. He is a master coach and has taught and trains many of the top fighters coming about now.
> Have you sparred with him? I can arrange it for you no problem and you can film it and show us how to deal with him. Let me know and it will happen.



I haven't sparred with Peter Irving. But I think I could cope with a friendly sparring session with most MMA fighters at that level, having done so. I have sparred with some of the people you train/did train, for example Neil Broadbent, who was good. I don't think there is anything wrong with Peter Irvings skills and I respect his ability and his willingness to put it on the line. But merely saying "Peter Irving" is not an argument ending statement in the way your student intended it to be. 



> As far as sparring and force flow goes. You do not know what you are looking for so your comments and opinion are just your limited points of view which have no level of meaning



Then please provide meaning. I would genuinely like to understand the methadology involved and the purpose.



> Chi Sao is all about control of energy and awareness of pressure control.



Ok, so chi sau in CSL wing chun is about learning to effect the body and balance of the opponent. Would you say that it is a kind of standing grappling method? How do the energy and presssure control skills developend in this chi sau translate to fighting? I am unclear how the chi sau skills, which appear to be used literally as if chi sau is a type of fighting, translate to actual fighting?



> I have 100s of free clips of my youtube channel and over 900 lessons on my web site. So its not a simple as you seem to think. Why do you think one clip on a small area is the whole?



I haven't said it is simple, and I have seen some of your other clips. The drills, order and purpose of teaching appears to be different to those in VT I have experienced and I would like to understand why, given claims being made. 



> Why do you think a clip of live sparring does not show chi sao skills? Sparring will look like sparring. The timing and control of weight position and many more things are all form chi sao training.



I wouldn't expect sparring to look like chi sau in the VT I am familiar with. But then chi sau isn't applied literally. In CSL it appears to be applied literally, i.e. chi sau is treated as a kind of competition. Is this correct?


----------



## LFJ

Not sure why you're trying to deflect, KPM. Nothing here is about WSLVT and I'm not saying anything is good or bad, better or worse. 

Just wondering why the stuff Alan shows in his clips unbalancing opponents and bouncing them around with "force flow" skills never shows up in any sparring or fighting by him or his team when that seems to be the end goal.

Can you link the sparring clips in which you said it appears?


----------



## SaulGoodman

So you know Neil? Interesting.... When did you train with him and for how long?


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> So you know Neil? Interesting.... When did you train with him and for how long?



I wouldn't say I know him. I trained with him one time and thought he was good.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Alan Orr said:


> Yes most wing chun 'fighting' clips are just feeder drills. My clips are live training with fighters.


Hi Alan, welcome to MartialTalk! I've enjoyed watching your videos on YouTube.

I do have a question regarding the sparring videos posted above. How much do the boxing gloves affect your choice of technique and angle of punches? I'm seeing a lot more hooking punches than I'm used to from most WC practitioners. It looks like you are mostly using these when your sparring partner is covering up with a tight guard and you need to get around his gloves. If you were fighting bareknuckle or with MMA gloves, do you think you would be sending more of those punches down the centerline and through his guard?


----------



## PiedmontChun

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hi Alan, welcome to MartialTalk! I've enjoyed watching your videos on YouTube.
> 
> I do have a question regarding the sparring videos posted above. How much do the boxing gloves affect your choice of technique and angle of punches? I'm seeing a lot more hooking punches than I'm used to from most WC practitioners. It looks like you are mostly using these when your sparring partner is covering up with a tight guard and you need to get around his gloves. If you were fighting bareknuckle or with MMA gloves, do you think you would be sending more of those punches down the centerline and through his guard?



Good question. I'm glad to see Alan dropped in, and hopefully he circles back and can address this.


----------



## KPM

Not sure why you're trying to deflect, KPM. Nothing here is about WSLVT and I'm not saying anything is good or bad, better or worse.

_---Well, let's see.  Your comment about Alan's video was:   "All I see is lead feet, overreaching, and getting punched in the face."    Sounds kind of critical to me.  I think that falls in the category of seeing something as "bad" or "worse" than whatever you think is your standard.  I just asked for video of WSL people showing a better standard....the one you are using for comparison.  _


Just wondering why the stuff Alan shows in his clips unbalancing opponents and bouncing them around with "force flow" skills never shows up in any sparring or fighting by him or his team when that seems to be the end goal.

_---I don't think you've look very hard for it._

Can you link the sparring clips in which you said it appears?

---_This one goes back and forth from Chi Sau into light sparring and back again._






_Here Alan explains how some of  the forceflow ideas from Chi Sau are applied in sparring:_






_Here's another one showing the Chi Sau to light sparring transitions:_






_Here's an explanation of how Chi Sau elements are used in sparring_:






_Plenty there if you just look for it!_


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> ---_This one goes back and forth from Chi Sau into light sparring and back again._



Any body manipulation of the kind shown in recent clips only appears when Alan and Neil are contesting from the chi sau type platform they use. I can't see it in broken contact striking or in grappling.



> _Here Alan explains how some of  the forceflow ideas from Chi Sau are applied in sparring_



There isn't any sparring here. Argument appears to be a straw man - where is pushing from the shoulder and bending at the waist emphasised in any wing chun?



> _Here's another one showing the Chi Sau to light sparring transitions:_



This again appears to be a kind of chi sau contest



> _Here's an explanation of how Chi Sau elements are used in sparring_



This is interesting. Alan's portrayal of standard wing chun appears very unlike the VT I know. I don't know those movements as tan and jum for example, nor the way they are being used. Similarly the brief coverage of CSL strategies is very different to standard VT, based very much on shot for shot, cover retaliate type ideas. Again balance disruption is shown from a 2 hands on body situation, i.e. grappling or competitive chi sau. 

I still don't see it being used in real time.


----------



## SaulGoodman

I'm going to have a chat with Neil to see if he can recollect who you are. Based on your incredibly incisive observational skills on what everybody is doing wrong, especially Alan Orr and his people you must be some kind of prodigy. If that is the case I'm sure he will remember you...


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> I'm going to have a chat with Neil to see if he can recollect who you are. Based on your incredibly incisive observational skills on what everybody is doing wrong, especially Alan Orr and his people you must be some kind of prodigy. If that is the case I'm sure he will remember you...



That may be the case. Do you remember the old SFUK forum, before cagewarriors?


----------



## KPM

Any body manipulation of the kind shown in recent clips only appears when Alan and Neil are contesting from the chi sau type platform they use. I can't see it in broken contact striking or in grappling.

_---And I stated  before....these things happen when a bridge is established.  "Broken contact striking" means no bridge.  It is the transitions between actual rolling and the light sparring that count in this example.  Any of that contact could have continued as sparring rather than going back to rolling._



There isn't any sparring here. Argument appears to be a straw man - where is pushing from the shoulder and bending at the waist emphasised in any wing chun?

_---I clearly said this was an explanation of how these elements are used in sparring._ 



This again appears to be a kind of chi sau contest

_---Showing transitions to light sparring._ 



I still don't see it being used in real time.

_----Show me an example of what you mean.   Let's see some VT being used in "real time."_


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> And I stated before....these things happen when a bridge is established. "Broken contact striking" means no bridge. It is the transitions between actual rolling and the light sparring that count in this example. Any of that contact could have continued as sparring rather than going back to rolling.



Does sticking with arms ever happen in real fighting? Arms clash, but I don't see time to effect the whole body in the way Alan is showing (i.e. slowly) during these fleeting moments.



KPM said:


> I clearly said this was an explanation of how these elements are used in sparring.



We just had a big thread about po pai in wing chun, didn't we? 



KPM said:


> Showing transitions to light sparring



Where do such transitions exist in fighting when nobody is entering or exiting chi sau?



KPM said:


> Show me an example of what you mean. Let's see some VT being used in "real time."



I'm sorry, I don't have video


----------



## JowGaWolf

guy b. said:


> Does sticking with arms ever happen in real fighting? Arms clash, but I don't see time to effect the whole body in the way Alan is showing (i.e. slowly) during these fleeting moments.
> 
> 
> 
> We just had a big thread about po pai in wing chun, didn't we?
> 
> 
> 
> Where do such transitions exist in fighting when nobody is entering or exiting chi sau?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, I don't have video



Too bad this is a wing chun forum and too bad I didn't record tonight's sparring session.  I did a lot of redirecting of force tonight during free sparring.


----------



## Alan Orr

guy b. said:


> I'm interested because CSL wing chun makes extraordinary claims. Generally I have no problem with what you are doing and I think it is good to see wing chun in MMA. But I don't understand the basis of some of the claims being made, and explanations given are very minimal, or completely incomprehensible when they come from HS. My opinion is of course guided by my experience of wing chun, how else could it be?
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't sparred with Peter Irving. But I think I could cope with a friendly sparring session with most MMA fighters at that level, having done so. I have sparred with some of the people you train/did train, for example Neil Broadbent, who was good. I don't think there is anything wrong with Peter Irvings skills and I respect his ability and his willingness to put it on the line. But merely saying "Peter Irving" is not an argument ending statement in the way your student intended it to be.
> 
> 
> 
> Then please provide meaning. I would genuinely like to understand the methadology involved and the purpose.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so chi sau in CSL wing chun is about learning to effect the body and balance of the opponent. Would you say that it is a kind of standing grappling method? How do the energy and presssure control skills developend in this chi sau translate to fighting? I am unclear how the chi sau skills, which appear to be used literally as if chi sau is a type of fighting, translate to actual fighting?
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't said it is simple, and I have seen some of your other clips. The drills, order and purpose of teaching appears to be different to those in VT I have experienced and I would like to understand why, given claims being made.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't expect sparring to look like chi sau in the VT I am familiar with. But then chi sau isn't applied literally. In CSL it appears to be applied literally, i.e. chi sau is treated as a kind of competition. Is this correct?



appears... You just guess and throw out what you think.But you have no clue.  Your Wing Chun is not the same so you can't seem to understand people have different approaches. I'm not hear to explain my whole system to you.


----------



## Alan Orr

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hi Alan, welcome to MartialTalk! I've enjoyed watching your videos on YouTube.
> 
> I do have a question regarding the sparring videos posted above. How much do the boxing gloves affect your choice of technique and angle of punches? I'm seeing a lot more hooking punches than I'm used to from most WC practitioners. It looks like you are mostly using these when your sparring partner is covering up with a tight guard and you need to get around his gloves. If you were fighting bareknuckle or with MMA gloves, do you think you would be sending more of those punches down the centerline and through his guard?



Thank you Tony. Boxing gloves to reduced a few things but that add many more. The development of timing, conditioning and focus is all important with gloves. Yes we do spar bareknuckle as well and more or less the angles are the same.


----------



## guy b.

Alan Orr said:


> appears... You just guess and throw out what you think.But you have no clue.  Your Wing Chun is not the same so you can't seem to understand people have different approaches. I'm not hear to explain my whole system to you.



You really used the opportunity to describe your different approach.

I guess only questions from people that already agree are welcome. Makes sense; you need to make a living at the end of the day.


----------



## SaulGoodman

guy b. said:


> That may be the case. Do you remember the old SFUK forum, before cagewarriors?


Holy sh@t I was being sarcastic, I do know Niel but as for your "vt skills" I suspect if he does indeed remember you he won't be singing your praises. 


guy b. said:


> You really used the opportunity to describe your different approach.
> 
> I guess only questions from people that already agree are welcome. Makes sense; you need to make a living at the end of the day.



I don't know you or Alan, "guy" but you come across as incredibly arrogant and patronising. You're English composition is very good and some of your observations are interesting. But why such a hardon for these guys? I've watched a lot of Alan's clips and though don't consider myself a genius or the worlds best wc practitioner, a lot of what he shows make sense. I don't agree with all he says but that's how it should be. I trained for many years under master Sofos , which is where I know Niel from. I have touched hands with guys from Clive potter, ex Nino Bernardo and other WSL people. Did I destroy them, no. Did they destroy me,no. The point is, you seem so heavily invested in the WSL paradigm that you refuse to see any good in other people's methods. For the record I haven't touched hands with any csl people but will endeavour to get to one of Alan's seminars the next time he is in the uk. Btw, saying to the guy that he wasted the oppurtuniyu to explain his system to you is incredibly arrogant. Tbh there is a dearth of his clips out there which more than address your questions and perhaps after viewing them all if you still don't understand their content maybe the problem is with your comprehension of what you are seeing. If you're so interested in learning/understanding this guys methods, rather than continually asking for free lessons why not go to one of his seminars and pay like everyone else. I will.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> You really used the opportunity to describe your different approach.
> 
> I guess only questions from people that already agree are welcome. Makes sense; you need to make a living at the end of the day.



   Like I said before, Alan obviously has little time or patience for people who seem to be just looking for things to criticize and not truly trying to understand what he is doing.  Maybe that's not you.  But you sure come across that way on the forum.


----------



## KPM

Does sticking with arms ever happen in real fighting?

--_Heck yeah it does!   Things don't have to go directly to a body-to-body clinch.  If you actually know Wing Chun, that transition from unattached punching to what you are calling "grappling" is where Wing Chun shines.  Otherwise, why spend all that time practicing Chi Sau?_ _ Jow Ga Wolf just mentioned doing the same thing in his recent sparring session. _



We just had a big thread about po pai in wing chun, didn't we?

_---Yeah.  So what's your point?_



Where do such transitions exist in fighting when nobody is entering or exiting chi sau?

---_So you think fighting is only "unattached" kickboxing??_


----------



## SaulGoodman

Good observations KPM, wc is a short bridge system which should shine in standing clinch range. I have studied submission wrestling and can see the beauty of the art in the stand up grappling range.


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Holy sh@t I was being sarcastic, I do know Niel but as for your "vt skills" I suspect if he does indeed remember you he won't be singing your praises



Maybe I should ask him if he remembers "Saul Goodman".



SaulGoodman said:


> I don't know you or Alan, "guy" but you come across as incredibly arrogant and patronising.



Why is it arrogant to ask questions when big claims are made? Apparently the CSL group has reinvented wing chun. I would like to know why and how. That is all.



SaulGoodman said:


> You're English composition is very good and some of your observations are interesting.



Thanks



SaulGoodman said:


> a lot of what he shows make sense.



Alan seems happy to discuss when people are agreeing but not happy to discuss when they are not. To me that seems quite arrogant. 

In the clips shown on the previous page Alan shows a very odd "standard" wing chun interpretation of tan, and a really odd CSL jum. I think these are worth discussing, because if the basics of CSL group before they got together are flawed or non-standard, then it might explain some of the subsequent developments. 



SaulGoodman said:


> I trained for many years under master Sofos , which is where I know Niel from








This guy?



SaulGoodman said:


> I have touched hands with guys from Clive potter, ex Nino Bernardo



No comment



SaulGoodman said:


> other WSL people.



Who?



SaulGoodman said:


> Tbh there is a dearth of his clips out there which more than address your questions and perhaps after viewing them all if you still don't understand their content maybe the problem is with your comprehension of what you are seeing.



Not sure you understand what dearth means. I agree btw



SaulGoodman said:


> maybe the problem is with your comprehension of what you are seeing



A reluctance to answer basic questions, apart from those asked in a sycophantic way, is usually associated with a lack of answers in my experience. Alan seems to have come to the forum for no other reason than to issue a brave proxy challenge match to me via his friend, MMA fighter Peter Irving. This doesn't seem like the behaviour of a balanced individual.


----------



## KPM

Guy wrote:
Apparently the CSL group has reinvented wing chun.


_---Just because it is different from what you do does not make it "reinvented."  You have posted things about WSLVT that have left me wondering as well.   You say that none of the techniques from Chi Sau or Lop Sau etc are actually used in fighting.  You say that you don't think there would be any "attachment" to the opponent when fighting...just unattached punching.  You say there are no "applications" in WSLVT.  You say  there is no Tan Da in WSLVT.  You say WSLVT is all about the punch.   To me, all of this sounds a lot less like "standard" Wing Chun than CSL Wing Chun!   So I would be careful about using the word "reinvented" in reference to anyone else's method!_


Guy also wrote:
A reluctance to answer basic questions, apart from those asked in a sycophantic way, is usually associated with a lack of answers in my experience.

_---Not true at all.   As I have already said, Alan has little time or patience for people that are just looking for something to criticize.   And someone that has just pronounced that CSL has "reinvented Wing Chun" obviously is not asking questions because they truly want to learn._


----------



## SaulGoodman

guy b. said:


> Maybe I should ask him if he remembers "Saul Goodman".
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it arrogant to ask questions when big claims are made? Apparently the CSL group has reinvented wing chun. I would like to know why and how. That is all.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Alan seems happy to discuss when people are agreeing but not happy to discuss when they are not. To me that seems quite arrogant.
> 
> In the clips shown on the previous page Alan shows a very odd "standard" wing chun interpretation of tan, and a really odd CSL jum. I think these are worth discussing, because if the basics of CSL group before they got together are flawed or non-standard, then it might explain some of the subsequent developments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy?
> 
> 
> 
> No comment
> 
> 
> 
> Who?
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure you understand what dearth means. I agree btw
> 
> 
> 
> A reluctance to answer basic questions, apart from those asked in a sycophantic way, is usually associated with a lack of answers in my experience. Alan seems to have come to the forum for no other reason than to issue a brave proxy challenge match to me via his friend, MMA fighter Peter Irving. This doesn't seem like the behaviour of a balanced individual.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Haha, you got me there! Perhaps abundance should have been substituted for dearth.

Ok, so it's funny that because I mentioned that I trained under the Sofos guys for some time you immediately trawl the net to find that hilarious Sid Sofos "cult" clip to pethaps, in your mind, devalue the weight of my opinion. A tad childish methinks. For the record I left his organization a long time ago and have sought to improve my skills elsewhere.

Like I said the WSL guys I touched hands with were no great shakes. Who were they? I don't think it matters as you would probably say they don't have  the real "VT" that only you seem to have.

Calling Mr Orr unbalanced? So not only are you the most enlightened practitioner of "ving tsun" on the planet but you're also a physchiatrist as well, impressive..,

As for the brave proxy challenge match, from what I've read on the other forum you were disrespectful about the pedigree of one of his guys and he offered you the chance of a friendly spar with the said individual so you can show your stuff. Rather than accept the offer you made a counter offer saying you would want payment to do this. Of course no one in their right mind is going to pay an unknown quantity to spar a professional mma fighter, which of course you knew full well before making the offer. A very "brave" get out clause to avoid perhaps showing us that your skills ain't quite what you claim them to be.,.,:


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---Well, let's see.  Your comment about Alan's video was:   "All I see is lead feet, overreaching, and getting punched in the face."    Sounds kind of critical to me.  I think that falls in the category of seeing something as "bad" or "worse" than whatever you think is your standard.  I just asked for video of WSL people showing a better standard....the one you are using for comparison._



Wasn't comparing WC systems. Just stating what I observed while waiting 4 rounds to see the effects of force flow on his opponent, which never appeared.



> ---_This one goes back and forth from Chi Sau into light sparring and back again._
> 
> _Here Alan explains how some of  the forceflow ideas from Chi Sau are applied in sparring:_
> 
> _Here's another one showing the Chi Sau to light sparring transitions:_
> 
> _Here's an explanation of how Chi Sau elements are used in sparring_:



_Gwo-sau_ is what you consider free sparring? I thought you were talking about the kind of thing he and Peter were doing.

I don't need another video of explanation. 

I'm simply asking where the effects of force flow on the opponent are in their free fighting. The unbalancing and bouncing them around bit.

If it actually works, and they spend so much time on it, one would expect to see it in their fights, but it never seems to appear.

Alan says it's because the force flow is invisible, so unless you understand it, you can't see it. 

But no, what would be perfectly visible is the physical effect placed on the opponent's body as their balance is manipulated like in the demo clips. We never see that in free fighting. That's the part Alan won't address.


----------



## tshadowchaser

Lets keep the discussion civil.    
As for challenges  they are against the rules here.  
Perhaps all involved in this thread need to read the rules of the forum


----------



## mograph

LFJ said:


> Just stating what I observed while waiting 4 rounds to see the effects of force flow on his opponent, which never appeared.


Just checking: which post # contains those clips? I'd like to check them out.


----------



## tshadowchaser

mograph said:


> Just checking: which post # contains those clips? I'd like to check them out.


 post # 44


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Ok, so it's funny that because I mentioned that I trained under the Sofos guys for some time you immediately trawl the net to find that hilarious Sid Sofos "cult" clip to pethaps, in your mind, devalue the weight of my opinion. A tad childish methinks. For the record I left his organization a long time ago and have sought to improve my skills elsewhere.



I've never heard of Sid Sofos. I typed his name into google and this was what came up. Is this the guy? Can't say I watched the clip, it looked pretty dull.



SaulGoodman said:


> Like I said the WSL guys I touched hands with were no great shakes. Who were they? I don't think it matters as you would probably say they don't have the real "VT" that only you seem to have.



In terms of WSL guys in the UK, it is very important who there were, as there are/were lots of frauds and seminar students. Who did you train with?



SaulGoodman said:


> Calling Mr Orr unbalanced?



He challenged me to a fight with his friend. Seems a bizarre thing to do on a discussion forum



SaulGoodman said:


> from what I've read on the other forum you were disrespectful about the pedigree of one of his guys



I identified Peter Irving as a low to mid level MMA fighter. This is a fact verifiable by checking his record, not an act of disrescpect towards Peter Irving, and certainly not towards Alan. It was really nice of Alan to jump in and protect his friend from this offence by offering a random stranger the chance to go and fight him. You don't find that a bit odd? I wonder why it is banned on the forum?



SaulGoodman said:


> Of course no one in their right mind is going to pay an unknown quantity to spar a professional mma fighter, which of course you knew full well before making the offer.



Your grammar is very confused again. It was me that was asking for the money, in order to fight Alan's representative for Alan's purposes. Why would I fight Peter Irving for no money? Fighting is hard work.



SaulGoodman said:


> A very "brave" get out clause to avoid perhaps showing us that your skills ain't quite what you claim them to be.,.,:



Alan often offers no money to people while trying to get them to fight in his shows. He usually wants them to do it for the exposure. Understandably these offers are not very popular among the UK MMA community. Simple common sense I would say.


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> Alan says it's because the force flow is invisible, so unless you understand it, you can't see it.



Maybe you have to believe it to see it?


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> ust because it is different from what you do does not make it "reinvented." You have posted things about WSLVT that have left me wondering as well. You say that none of the techniques from Chi Sau or Lop Sau etc are actually used in fighting. You say that you don't think there would be any "attachment" to the opponent when fighting...just unattached punching. You say there are no "applications" in WSLVT. You say there is no Tan Da in WSLVT. You say WSLVT is all about the punch. To me, all of this sounds a lot less like "standard" Wing Chun than CSL Wing Chun! So I would be careful about using the word "reinvented" in reference to anyone else's method!



Making big claims but refusing to answer questions should be a warning for most people to be alert to the possibility that they are being conned. I have not shied away from answering questions about WSL VT where I can.

All of the above that you list are in line with core wing chun concepts. Block then punch, backwards moving tans, jum elbow going outwards - not so much. Looks more like basic misunderstanding of the system. And this is Alan's imitation of standard wing chun. It raises a few questions.



KPM said:


> ot true at all. As I have already said, Alan has little time or patience for people that are just looking for something to criticize. And someone that has just pronounced that CSL has "reinvented Wing Chun" obviously is not asking questions because they truly want to learn.



I would happly switch to being a student of Alan's if it was the best thing to do. I worry about Alan's ability to answer questions, more than his willingness.


----------



## KPM

All of the above that you list are in line with core wing chun concepts.

_---A Tan Da is not in line with core Wing Chun concepts?  Only trying to punch the opponent and not using anything else..IS in line with core Wing Chun concepts?   Not establishing a bridge to work from IS in line with core Wing Chun concepts?  I don't think so!_


 Block then punch, backwards moving tans, jum elbow going outwards - not so much. Looks more like basic misunderstanding of the system.

_---A backward moving Tan Sau is called a "Tun Sau" and uses the concept of "swallow."  This is a common technique in mainland Wing Chun systems.   It is a core technique in Pin Sun Wing Chun.  I've pointed this out before on other threads, if you were paying attention_.



 And this is Alan's imitation of standard wing chun. It raises a few questions.

----_The only question here in my mind, is how much you know about any Wing Chun that isn't WSLVT.  And the answer seems to  be....not much!_ 


 I worry about Alan's ability to answer questions, more than his willingness.

_---No need to worry about that.  I can assure you that Alan is able to answer questions quite well for those he thinks are actually worth answering.     You haven't done anything more than turn another thread into a big argument.....again!_


----------



## wckf92

guy b. said:


> Block then punch, backwards moving tans, jum elbow going outwards - not so much. Looks more like basic misunderstanding of the system.



I may have missed it, but which video or post was this? Would like to view the items Guy is mentioning.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Guy you come across as a patronizing school teacher, my grammar is perfectly adequate thanks. The "unknown quantity" I mentioned is you.

You seem to know an awful lot about how Alan Orr does things, maybe you know him better than you are letting on?

Your perception of the comments made regarding the spar offer on the other forum is way off mark. At no stage was a fight/death match/gong Sao suggested, you seem a trifle paranoid.

I read that you claim to have trained at his Kwoon. What took place? Did you dismantle Alan and his students with your superior skills? Did you even have the guts to let him know who you are?

I reckon it's a big fat no to all of them.


----------



## KPM

_Gwo-sau_ is what you consider free sparring? I thought you were talking about the kind of thing he and Peter were doing.

_---I said "light sparring." There are different types of sparring.   Here is another video showing the fluid movement between Chi Sao rolling to light sparring and back again.  Just because they don't have on gloves and look like an MMA match is no reason to think this is not also a form of sparring._







I don't need another video of explanation.

---_Since you didn't seem to pay attention to the prior ones, maybe you do!  _


I'm simply asking where the effects of force flow on the opponent are in their free fighting. The unbalancing and bouncing them around bit.

_---Maybe a little more apparent in the video I just posted._


If it actually works, and they spend so much time on it, one would expect to see it in their fights, but it never seems to appear.

_---Well.  The exact same thing can be said of the videos that PB has posted so often.  For the amount of time they spend on the Lop Sau, to roll to punch, you'd also think it would show in their fights....but Guy has said it doesn't.  Oh,  there is also the small problem of the fact that they do seem to spar or fight!_


----------



## dudewingchun

@Guyb.. you act like you can spar with someone of Peter Irving's level no problem but then when you get offered a chance to, you make a big deal out of it. If you are so good you really should have no problem doing it ? We dedicate ourselves to learning a fighting art so why would actually fighting be a big deal ?


----------



## Xue Sheng

I predict this thread will soon be locked


----------



## SaulGoodman

My final word on this thread regarding Guy B's rather passive aggressive nature relates to a threat he put out to a member of Kung fu magazine a while back (seeing as he's so fond of pointing out what others have done or said). It relates to a thread regarding a terrible sparring clip featuring a WSL instructor sparring a hsing-I guy (I think). He felt it was the best example of "ving tsun" under pressure available on the net. It was met with howls of derision by people who know what proper fighting/hard contact looks like. His response to one individual who questioned the validity of the clip was simply 

"Post a credible clip and we can talk. Until then you are nothing and you stink of fear. I would smash you up standing I think. And I would break you to bits on the ground."

What a hypocrite.


----------



## JowGaWolf

Xue Sheng said:


> I predict this thread will soon be locked


unfortunately.  I didn't think the discussion would take this path.  I was hoping to gain some more insight on the thinking of WC practitioners.  I don't get a chance to spar with many so this is my only way to have an idea of how I have to make changes in how I apply my techniques in order to deal with WC.


----------



## SaulGoodman

JowGaWolf said:


> unfortunately.  I didn't think the discussion would take this path.  I was hoping to gain some more insight on the thinking of WC practitioners.  I don't get a chance to spar with many so this is my only way to have an idea of how I have to make changes in how I apply my techniques in order to deal with WC.



Rather than trying to find solutions of how to deal with Wc people on a Wc forum ,which seems a bit strange, why not seek outa Wc club or instructor and get some training? The best way to learn how to deal with an art is to train it...


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> You seem to know an awful lot about how Alan Orr does things, maybe you know him better than you are letting on?



I have no idea



> Your perception of the comments made regarding the spar offer on the other forum is way off mark.



Offering your friend to fight someone because you are arguing with them on a forum is insane. I have sparred guys like Peter Irving before so would be possible. I am just not interested in providing free promotional material for Alan.



> I read that you claim to have trained at his Kwoon. What took place? Did you dismantle Alan and his students with your superior skills? Did you even have the guts to let him know who you are?



Of course I introduced myself to Alan. I don't think I had ever argued with him on a forum at that time. I went to see because I was training MMA in London at the time when he was spammng the forums. He was based in Swiss Cottage. Training wasn't particularly impressive. There was no sparring apart from grappling which they were very bad at. Alan came across as a bit of an egomaniac, but in an understandable kind of way. Prices were a bit silly. The main impression I came away with was TMA teacher jumping on the MMA bandwagon, students more money than sense. It was obviously a money earning enterprise rather than a serious place to train given options in that area at that time. That's about all that happened. My real insight into it happened somewhere else.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Are you autistic or something? Do you realize how insulting you come across when you throw out sweeping statements about other people's classes/skills. Do you have any empathy with people you meet face to face because you have none in this environment.


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> My final word on this thread regarding Guy B's rather passive aggressive nature relates to a threat he put out to a member of Kung fu magazine



Maybe Alan is a master of deadpan and we will all be laughing tomorrow?


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Are you autistic or something? Do you realize how insulting you come across when you throw out sweeping statements about other people's classes/skills. Do you have any empathy with people you meet face to face because you have none in this environment.



I would say don't ask questions if you don't want answers.

Are the questions supposed to stun me into silence or something? Not sure why you are asking them


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> I would say don't ask questions if you don't want answers.
> 
> Are the questions supposed to stun me into silence or something? Not sure why you are asking them



Guy, can you please drop the back and forth and get back on topic? ....Force flow, remember? This is beginning to sound like the threads where you and KPM were locking horns. I'm sure who comes out on top is very important to the parties involved, but it makes for a piss-poor forum discussion.

The best question you brought up was how you don't see a lot of the unbalancing and body control in the Alan Orr _sparring_ clips you posted. I see your point, but on the other hand I have worked with an MMA/Escrima guy named Martin Torres who also uses unbalancing pressure in his system. You can really _see_ it when things get close ...toward the clinch. You don't see it, but I definitely feel it (being on the receiving end) at the boxing range. Contact is too brief to see anything, but his angling and pressure totally jacks me up. Different stuff, to be sure, but still, maybe this would apply to what Alan is showing in those clips?


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---Maybe a little more apparent in the video I just posted._


_
_
It doesn't happen in that video either. 

When they go to what you call light sparring there is just loose striking and then clinch. Somewhere between this range is where supposedly he should be establishing a "bridge" and then using "force flow" to unbalance the guy and bounce him around while striking him.

It never happens.

Even if it did in light training with a likeminded person, it is still never seen in their actual fights. All we see is free striking and grappling, because that's what actually works.

_



			---Well.  The exact same thing can be said of the videos that PB has posted so often.  For the amount of time they spend on the Lop Sau, to roll to punch, you'd also think it would show in their fights....
		
Click to expand...

_
There is a very important difference here.

This force flow thing is said to be used directly in fighting. The end goal is to be able to manipulate the opponent's body and balance while striking them. But it never happens.

Training drills in WSLVT are abstract, not meant to be used directly in fighting. We train _pun-sau_ to develop the punch. _Pun-sau_ doesn't happen in fighting, but punching obviously does. There's no disconnect between what we say we use in fighting, and what is actually used.


----------



## Alan Orr

guy b. said:


> I've never heard of Sid Sofos. I typed his name into google and this was what came up. Is this the guy? Can't say I watched the clip, it looked pretty dull.
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of WSL guys in the UK, it is very important who there were, as there are/were lots of frauds and seminar students. Who did you train with?
> 
> 
> 
> He challenged me to a fight with his friend. Seems a bizarre thing to do on a discussion forum
> 
> 
> 
> I identified Peter Irving as a low to mid level MMA fighter. This is a fact verifiable by checking his record, not an act of disrescpect towards Peter Irving, and certainly not towards Alan. It was really nice of Alan to jump in and protect his friend from this offence by offering a random stranger the chance to go and fight him. You don't find that a bit odd? I wonder why it is banned on the forum?
> 
> 
> 
> Your grammar is very confused again. It was me that was asking for the money, in order to fight Alan's representative for Alan's purposes. Why would I fight Peter Irving for no money? Fighting is hard work.
> 
> 
> 
> Alan often offers no money to people while trying to get them to fight in his shows. He usually wants them to do it for the exposure. Understandably these offers are not very popular among the UK MMA community. Simple common sense I would say.




Once again you make a a stupid statement based on your limited insight. When I was running UK shows they where very well put together and for the passion of developing and showcasing fighters. All pro fighters where paid on my shows. Plus well looked after. Hotels, flights from Europe with their coaches, taxis, food. The list goes on. Amateur fighters where not pay as that is what amateur means. But they got great ticket deals and lots of free stuff like mma gloves. Everyone loved fighting on my events. 

You what to be paid to fight right so hat is your pro record? you seem to know a lot about the sport. What is your full name so we can look you up.


----------



## Alan Orr

guy b. said:


> I have no idea
> 
> 
> 
> Offering your friend to fight someone because you are arguing with them on a forum is insane. I have sparred guys like Peter Irving before so would be possible. I am just not interested in providing free promotional material for Alan.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I introduced myself to Alan. I don't think I had ever argued with him on a forum at that time. I went to see because I was training MMA in London at the time when he was spammng the forums. He was based in Swiss Cottage. Training wasn't particularly impressive. There was no sparring apart from grappling which they were very bad at. Alan came across as a bit of an egomaniac, but in an understandable kind of way. Prices were a bit silly. The main impression I came away with was TMA teacher jumping on the MMA bandwagon, students more money than sense. It was obviously a money earning enterprise rather than a serious place to train given options in that area at that time. That's about all that happened. My real insight into it happened somewhere else.



You came to a small general class 8 years ago for an hour? So you think you know about our training and level? My guys at the the where fighting MMA and had good success already. What is your background?
Our main training was not in the general beginners class. Of course back then our grappling was not what is is now as we are humble enough to keep learning and not just post rude statements on people we meet for a hour. I do not remember you introducing yourself and making any rude comments to our faces. Funny that.  Again your make statements based on your limited insights. I traveled around the world to train skills for my guys and their MMA fights and at that time where really just testing our wing chun for our own groups development. With 100's of wins and great feedback we are very happy with our efforts in MMA and wing chun.  
Money making ?? you mean hours and hours of free coaching and traveling with my guys? You have no clue and at just a sad troll. The same guys are in London and if you want to come and train then just please make it clear next time that you need to see our skill. 

Peter Irving is one of the best coaches and best fighters I have been luck to work with and call a friend. To listen to some fool on a forum talk down his mma record makes me sick.


----------



## Alan Orr

LFJ said:


> It doesn't happen in that video either.
> 
> When they go to what you call light sparring there is just loose striking and then clinch. Somewhere between this range is where supposedly he should be establishing a "bridge" and then using "force flow" to unbalance the guy and bounce him around while striking him.
> 
> It never happens.
> 
> Even if it did in light training with a likeminded person, it is still never seen in their actual fights. All we see is free striking and grappling, because that's what actually works.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a very important difference here.
> 
> This force flow thing is said to be used directly in fighting. The end goal is to be able to manipulate the opponent's body and balance while striking them. But it never happens.
> 
> Training drills in WSLVT are abstract, not meant to be used directly in fighting. We train _pun-sau_ to develop the punch. _Pun-sau_ doesn't happen in fighting, but punching obviously does. There's no disconnect between what we say we use in fighting, and what is actually used.



If you are blind to it then not much we can show you.  WSL Wing Chun is not the same as what we do. I know that style well. Its not the same approach. Once you have first hand experience then maybe you will feel the difference


----------



## LFJ

Alan Orr said:


> If you are blind to it then not much we can show you.  WSL Wing Chun is not the same as what we do. I know that style well. Its not the same approach. Once you have first hand experience then maybe you will feel the difference



I wasn't comparing it to WSLVT at all. KPM brought that up.

I'll say it once again... 

Force flow in your body may be invisible, but anyone with eyesight will not be blind to the physical effect it should have on the opponent's body as you manipulate their balance, bouncing them around while striking them, as can clearly be seen in your demos.

Yet that never happens in fights by your team though you present the skill as a goal of the training to be used directly in fighting.

Again, you seem unwilling to address this disconnect and just call me blind for not seeing something that never happens.


----------



## JowGaWolf

SaulGoodman said:


> Rather than trying to find solutions of how to deal with Wc people on a Wc forum ,which seems a bit strange, why not seek outa Wc club or instructor and get some training? The best way to learn how to deal with an art is to train it...


Sometimes you learn more by talking than by sparring.  I have no interest in learning how to do WC because learning WC won't help me learn how to apply my system against it.  I have already learned a little bit just from talking to people who do WC and seeing the videos.  

From where I sit it seems that the concept of redirecting force isn't universal in WC to the point where it's referred to as "force flow."  I guess for me it's just natural because of the 2 fighting systems I train in focuses on how we generate force, how we redirect force, how we deliver force.  It's pretty much core for us.  But based on what I've seen here WC isn't unified on this which means there are some WC practitioners out there who will have some really weak punches for the amount of years they have trained for.

Forward movement and forward pressure is also not a unified concept in WC and from the tons of WC videos I have seen. Many WC practitioners don't make good use of the kicks, and seem to be unaware of their leg position in relation to the opponent. 

Before anyone rips my head off these are just observations that I see as an outsider looking in.  I don't look at WC from a WC perspective so what I see as opportunities is done from the perspective of my fighting system.


----------



## KPM

JowGaWolf said:


> Sometimes you learn more by talking than by sparring.  I have no interest in learning how to do WC because learning WC won't help me learn how to apply my system against it.  I have already learned a little bit just from talking to people who do WC and seeing the videos.
> 
> From where I sit it seems that the concept of redirecting force isn't universal in WC to the point where it's referred to as "force flow."  I guess for me it's just natural because of the 2 fighting systems I train in focuses on how we generate force, how we redirect force, how we deliver force.  It's pretty much core for us.  But based on what I've seen here WC isn't unified on this which means there are some WC practitioners out there who will have some really weak punches for the amount of years they have trained for.
> 
> Forward movement and forward pressure is also not a unified concept in WC and from the tons of WC videos I have seen. Many WC practitioners don't make good use of the kicks, and seem to be unaware of their leg position in relation to the opponent.
> 
> Before anyone rips my head off these are just observations that I see as an outsider looking in.  I don't look at WC from a WC perspective so what I see as opportunities is done from the perspective of my fighting system.



Good observations!   Yes, Wing Chun is more diverse than people like Guy and LFJ would have you believe.  Sometimes that is a good thing, and sometimes not.  Sometimes the diversity comes from people or groups that have lost some of the skills.  Sometimes the diversity comes from people or groups that have simply developed in a different direction....not worse, just different.   Given that Wing Chun is the 2nd most practiced CMA in the world (behind Tai Chi), with lots of people now practicing it across the globe, you are just naturally going to see a lot of diversity and change.  There is no one authority figure making everyone toe the "party line" or providing the standard for everyone else to follow. 

Forceflow is definitely something you won't see in most Wing Chun.  That is a relatively new "revival" of a skill that some claim Wing Chun had originally but was lost over time.   The concept for Forward Pressure IS something that should be universal in Wing Chun, but some don't seem to apply it as well as others.  I agree with you that it is difficult to see so many videos of Wing Chun people doing Chi Sau while leaning back in their stance and only using the arms and think that this is "forward pressure." 

I'm interested in hearing what other things you see as vulnerabilities in Wing Chun from your systems fighting perspective.  Perhaps start a separate thread?


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> Yes, Wing Chun is more diverse than people like Guy and LFJ would have you believe.



Huh? I never said Wing Chun is not diverse.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Hey LFJ, I don't know much about Alan's flow stuff but have watched a ton of his free clips and when they do their gloved stuff I can see the principles sometimes when they get jammed up. Maybe these skills are more evident with prolonged contact? When simply throwing flurries of strikes I guess force flow doesn't really come into things? Also when he's doing doing his flow demoes he's exaggerating what he's doing in order for the viewer to see the raw mechanics. In application things seem to become much smaller besides why would his guys want to throw people way once they've bridged? Once in tight I would think their aim is to stay their force flow or not


----------



## LFJ

Given that FF is invisible, why is no one else looking for the clearly physical effect it is said to have on an opponent?

If it's invisible and also has no observable effect, it's indistinguishable from something that doesn't even happen.


----------



## SaulGoodman

I don't know LFJ, maybe it feels different hands-on so to speak?


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> I don't know LFJ, maybe it feels different hands-on so to speak?



This very thing has now been stated multiple times.  Seems that some people just don't want to hear that.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Not disagreeing Kpm, I did say that in some of the clips I've seen there is evidence (to me) of the flow concept in application. I think some things are far easier to quantify when you physically do them rather than just video


----------



## LFJ

SaulGoodman said:


> Not disagreeing Kpm, I did say that in some of the clips I've seen there is evidence (to me) of the flow concept in application. I think some things are far easier to quantify when you physically do them rather than just video



Were they clips of his fight team in actual contests?

Someone being unbalanced is clearly perceptible to an onlooker. Doesn't require that I feel the loss of balance myself.

I'm not taking anything away from his fighters, but what do we see in the ring? 

Unbridged striking, clinch, and BJJ ground skills.

That's great. Those are things that work. FF has not been demonstrated to have ever been used in fighting the way it is claimed to work.

They'd probably be better off dropping the _chi-sau_ tricks, and just working more on the stuff that is actually functional outside of _chi-sau_.


----------



## SaulGoodman

You seem to want to debunk their stuff, why do you feel so strongly about it?


----------



## LFJ

I'm just asking where it has been used in fighting, since that's the extraordinary claim that has been made.

Asking to see it in action is a debunking attempt? That's bizarre you'd think that.


----------



## SaulGoodman

I would say that "extraordinary" is no more bizarre a term than "debunking". I'm sorry, I must be really dumb but I can and have seen some of the force flow in evidence. And no, I'm not going to go through the trouble of tracking down clips that you probably won't be convinced by.
I have no vested interest in Alan Orr or his organization I just, like you, say what I see. I'm not looking for people flying through the air and subsequently being bludgeoned into a greasy spot during the course of an mma match.

 I understand the difference between demo and application, as you seem to. 
This is kind of a circular argument now, you won't accept it's worthwhile unless you see it applied in a way YOU want to see it applied. I believe where Alan's force flow stuff is concerned it seems to be the case that only feeling it/being on the receiving end of it will convince some people.


----------



## LFJ

SaulGoodman said:


> I would say that "extraordinary" is no more bizarre a term than "debunking".



I didn't say the term was bizarre, but the idea that asking to see it used as claimed is an attempt to debunk it, rather than a reasonable request.



> This is kind of a circular argument now, you won't accept it's worthwhile unless you see it applied in a way YOU want to see it applied.



The way I want to see it applied is the way in which it is claimed to be applicable.



> I believe where Alan's force flow stuff is concerned it seems to be the case that only feeling it/being on the receiving end of it will convince some people.



He demos a clear physical effect on the opponent's balance, does he not? 

If what the opponent feels doesn't actually affect them, what does it accomplish?


----------



## SaulGoodman

I'm starting to realize how Alan Orr must feel... 

I'm out


----------



## JowGaWolf

KPM said:


> Good observations!   Yes, Wing Chun is more diverse than people like Guy and LFJ would have you believe.  Sometimes that is a good thing, and sometimes not.  Sometimes the diversity comes from people or groups that have lost some of the skills.  Sometimes the diversity comes from people or groups that have simply developed in a different direction....not worse, just different.   Given that Wing Chun is the 2nd most practiced CMA in the world (behind Tai Chi), with lots of people now practicing it across the globe, you are just naturally going to see a lot of diversity and change.  There is no one authority figure making everyone toe the "party line" or providing the standard for everyone else to follow.
> 
> Forceflow is definitely something you won't see in most Wing Chun.  That is a relatively new "revival" of a skill that some claim Wing Chun had originally but was lost over time.   The concept for Forward Pressure IS something that should be universal in Wing Chun, but some don't seem to apply it as well as others.  I agree with you that it is difficult to see so many videos of Wing Chun people doing Chi Sau while leaning back in their stance and only using the arms and think that this is "forward pressure."
> 
> I'm interested in hearing what other things you see as vulnerabilities in Wing Chun from your systems fighting perspective.  Perhaps start a separate thread?


Those were the only things that were sticking out to me. The rest is mainly what I think I would try to do based on what I see.  Here's what I know about WC. You guys like to take the direct line to punching meaning much of what I can except are straight jab like punches. I won't be able to win trying to out punch someone on a direct path which is fine since my style is circular. If I fought against a WC practitioner then I would welcome constant forward pressured.  To me "constant forward pressure" means that you aren't thinking about moving backwards when you probably should move backwards.  I would probably try to drop low every now an then for a take down but mostly I would take angle.

Sweeps would definitely be on the menu. I'm not sure how much WC pays attention to their legs but when I watch the sparring videos even with Alan, the position of the legs were often within sweeping range.  This isn't to speak bad about WC, just an observation.  Besides how many times do we actually see people use a sweep or foot hook during sparring or professional fighting. From a personal perspective my job is to break my opponent's root, I can either to that by attacking low, by attacking, or attacking low an high at the same time.  So for my own personal things I like in my style, I would definitely go for WC legs.  I also know you guys like to make contact with my arms so you can go into your WC techniques so I would definitely try to avoid giving you punches that you are familiar with. 

I think the biggest advantage I would have is that most WC practitioners tend to get "tunnel vision"  where they are so focused on attacking up top.  I would definitely try to bait a WC practitioner and let him get just enough punches up top to get him to focus and forget about other parts.  Once I feel that commitment, then I'll attack where the person isn't thinking of.

The big advantage that I see in WC is that once they start punching in the middle, it almost instantly causes people to try to outpunch the WC practitioner in the middle.  WC rules the middle and that's the worst place to fight a WC practitioner.  If a punch comes to my center then I need to move my center and send a counter punch where there is least resistance.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Great observations Jowga, sounds like you have an excellent instructor! Was looking at some clips from your system the other day, very nice fluid/flowing art with good footwork and fast hand combinations. The hands in particular don't look disimilair to Wing Chun in some cases, I understand there is a hung gar influence there?


----------



## geezer

@J_ow Ga: _I liked your post (#117 above). Your thinking reflects the well known saying from Sun Tzu's _ Art of War, _"Know your enemy and yourself and you will be victorious in 100 battles." This another reason is why it's good to have intelligent commentary on this WC forum from non-Wing Chun people.


----------



## JustSomePerson

LFJ said:


> _Given that FF is invisible_, why is no one else looking for the clearly physical effect it is said to have on an opponent?
> 
> _If it's invisible and also has no observable effect, it's indistinguishable from something that doesn't even happen_.



Hi. Force Flow is technically not 'invisible' if you have the right instrumentation. For example, if I had a very powerful microscope, perhaps electron, you can see, albeit interpreted, a force passing through an object.

In branches of mathematics 'force flow' would be referred to as a vector and here a force vector. There are some materials that enable one to see the distribution of a load and the force exerted throughout the material.

For example please see this video.






03:56 is where you see some photoelastic material put under stress and the force flow through it. If your bones were made of this material or other parts of your body you would be able to see the force vectors pass through. Likewise, if you had good instrumentation you could 'see it' pass through bones and flesh too.

We can either talk physics properly and use the correct terms or choose a half way house such as force flow as most don't do mathematics and physics.

In sum, yes, to the human eye it is invisible but it is there and I hope to have provided some thoughts that may allow some to understand the idea of force flow a little better.

Sometimes when we talk about having good structure we are talking about the ratio of a force vector that passes through the skeletal structure as opposed to the more fleshy parts and if your body had the same properties of that photoelastic material, you would be able see how that ratio changes as you position and reposition your body to be more structurally aligned or not.

It is true, when we have incorrect tension the force vector will distribute to the fleshy parts over the skeletal structure and this is what some people mean by it becoming 'jammed'. There is nothing mystical it is all just science. The issue is always one of articulation and the extent to which some will exploit ignorance here to insert their own frameworks. Others, as stated, attempt a half way house because most folk are not good with overly technical and 'scientific' terminology. 'Reaching/attaining Song' helps prevent 'jamming' in my view and allows one to 'feel' a vector force and to use it more efficiently.

This is why SLT is so important as one is dealing with just gravity and the ground reaction force and the meditative aspect trains you to attend to the sensations in your body and to identify the force vectors passing through, whilst allowing you to play with body positions to experience changes in that ratio and to reach Song in this very basic mechanical system; gravity and the ground reaction force i.e. just those simple force vectors.

I hope some find what I write above useful.

Cheers


----------



## SaulGoodman

JustSomePerson said:


> Hi. Force Flow is technically not 'invisible' if you have the right instrumentation. For example, if I had a very powerful microscope, perhaps electron, you can see, albeit interpreted, a force passing through an object.
> 
> In branches of mathematics 'force flow' would be referred to as a vector and here a force vector. There are some materials that enable one to see the distribution of a load and the force exerted throughout the material.
> 
> For example please see this video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 03:56 is where you see some photoelastic material put under stress and the force flow through it. If your bones were made of this material or other parts of your body you would be able to see the force vectors pass through. Likewise, if you had good instrumentation you could 'see it' pass through bones and flesh too.
> 
> We can either talk physics properly and use the correct terms or choose a half way house such as force flow as most don't do mathematics and physics.
> 
> In sum, yes, to the human eye it is invisible but it is there and I hope to have provided some thoughts that may allow some to understand the idea of force flow a little better.
> 
> Sometimes when we talk about having good structure we are talking about the ratio of a force vector that passes through the skeletal structure as opposed to the more fleshy parts and if your body had the same properties of that photoelastic material, you would be able see how that ratio changes as you position and reposition your body to be more structurally aligned or not.
> 
> It is true, when we have incorrect tension the force vector will distribute to the fleshy parts over the skeletal structure and this is what some people mean by it becoming 'jammed'. There is nothing mystical it is all just science. The issue is always one of articulation and the extent to which some will exploit ignorance here to insert their own frameworks. Others, as stated, attempt a half way house because most folk are not good with overly technical and 'scientific' terminology. 'Reaching/attaining Song' helps prevent 'jamming' in my view and allows one to 'feel' a vector force and to use it more efficiently.
> 
> This is why SLT is so important as one is dealing with just gravity and the ground reaction force and the meditative aspect trains you to attend to the sensations in your body and to identify the force vectors passing through, whilst allowing you to play with body positions to experience changes in that ratio and to reach Song in this very basic mechanical system; gravity and the ground reaction force i.e. just those simple force vectors.
> 
> I hope some find what I write above useful.
> 
> Cheers


Great explanation, but I fear in some quarters people will still not accept its a tangible attribute to practice.


----------



## Alan Orr

LFJ said:


> I wasn't comparing it to WSLVT at all. KPM brought that up.
> 
> I'll say it once again...
> 
> Force flow in your body may be invisible, but anyone with eyesight will not be blind to the physical effect it should have on the opponent's body as you manipulate their balance, bouncing them around while striking them, as can clearly be seen in your demos.
> 
> Yet that never happens in fights by your team though you present the skill as a goal of the training to be used directly in fighting.
> 
> Again, you seem unwilling to address this disconnect and just call me blind for not seeing something that never happens.



As I have said my guys do use the skills in their fights. Against tough opponent in a live fight a lot of movement is countered and recounted. The whole point of force flow skills is sequence control to gain the edge, which is what you see live. My guys have great success and are known for being powerful and tough - these are what the opponent feels as my guys are not above average strength. I am not above average strength but most guys tell me I feel super strong when I'm in fact not working that hard. These are the results from the training of the skills. Training you have a limited insight to what we do so application more so. As I said turn up sometime and feel it rather that guess all the time. Oh introduce yourself, what is your name?


----------



## JustSomePerson

SaulGoodman said:


> Great explanation, but I fear in some quarters people will still not accept its a tangible attribute to practice.



Possibly. Everything I wrote is in the science books regardless of whether you apply it to wing chun or not. That's just the fact of the matter plain and simple and we can all feel compressive forces, tensile forces,. etc in our bodies, in our joints and in our bones (bones hurt when they break).

Thing is it is a restful mind that finds it most easy to attend to those nerve endings and the resulting 'feelings' in the mind:body coupling (should never have been divided in philosophy IMO).

People can continue to be 'flat earthers' but now that I have given the game away as to what we are really talking about, I think most rational people will come on board now. Photoelastic material is a great way to introduce the concept as are mechanical diagrams. I imagine I might start seeing people opting to use similar examples to get their ideas across now (that 'free use' has happened to me before and I don't mind).

When I read that people don't see force flow in other arts or in mma etc., I do cringe as, well, regardless of ones proficiency in exploiting force vectors its there; that's just the fact of the matter plain and simple.

I have been compiling drawings of all the major joints (bows) and actually calculating the vector force ratios as I described based upon positions using bog standard mechanics and trigonometry aka field of bio-mechanics on steroids. But that's just me, I am anally retentive and a bit autistic (true) and go that in depth. It is not for everyone nor required to be a top level wing chun practitioner with a high level of kung fu.

I will say this, its trained in bjj and other arts too just the language is different so yes, whilst people may say not tangible to train, if they look at their training they will find aspects that DO directly train it. This is what is so funny about this thread and certain folks responses. However, it does not help when some folk are equally argumentative and very stand offish in their attempts to position what they believe as 'above', 'greater than' or 'better'; there lies an ego grasping for legacy.

p.s.

(I am tired of the science bit in wing chun books just being focused on force = , acceleration = , impulse =, etc., because mechanics force diagrams,  trig and vectors are far more relevant for SLT and all this discussion of force flow and Song. I can think of a few reasons why the correct bits of maths and physics have not been utilised to date in the many, many wing chun books out there and why each and every bow or major joint, the nuances of their shapes and seating, have not been written about)


----------



## JustSomePerson

Alan Orr said:


> ...The whole point of force flow skills is sequence control to gain the edge ...



It really works. You could most probably set up photoelastic material in a system to watch a sequence to see the force flow and amplify, regardless of whether its loaded via an external 'force' i.e. pressure and compression of another person on your structure and body first. In terms of loading, you can see that too via the material I cite i.e. that potential energy is in the material and why to the eye you don't 'see' it per se; it loads in the bones, the other parts of the body and the ground upon which you stand.

Again, it may be a bit anally retentive to use that material to do that but sometimes, as this thread has shown, people need to 'see' something quite literally to understand it. Personally, I am going to spend that time instead trying to get it right in my own body so that I can apply it.


----------



## SaulGoodman

JustSomePerson said:


> It really works. You could most probably set up photoelastic material in a system to watch a sequence to see the force flow and amplify, regardless of whether its loaded via an external 'force' i.e. pressure and compression of another person on your structure and body first. In terms of loading, you can see that too via the material I cite i.e. that potential energy is in the material and why to the eye you don't 'see' it per se; it loads in the bones, the other parts of the body and the ground upon which you stand.
> 
> Again, it may be a bit anally retentive to use that material to do that but sometimes, as this thread has shown, people need to 'see' something quite literally to understand it. Personally, I am going to spend that time instead trying to get it right in my own body so that I can apply it.


I guess ultimately this is what they call "hidden skills" in CMA? I would be interested to see if a practitioner of an art like Hsing Yi or Bagua has problems grasping "force flow", I suspect not as after reading a lot of material recently on the subject internal arts seem to be familiar with these concepts.


----------



## JustSomePerson

SaulGoodman said:


> I guess ultimately this is what they call "hidden skills" in CMA? I would be interested to see if a practitioner of an art like Hsing Yi or Bagua has problems grasping "force flow", I suspect not as after reading a lot of material recently on the subject internal arts seem to be familiar with these concepts.



Yes you are right.  What's different now from the ancient period, PERHAPS (I don't know enough to give a definitive answer here), is that some folk are very, very skilled and have created exercises that really help engender those skills quickly. 

Granted such individual exercises are not original creations in the strictest sense of the term but the way they have been combined is. In other words it is not the variables i.e. each exercise, but the formulea i,e. program of exercises and how its been put together that is perhaps novel and new.

I imagine as I age and discover new things I may have to take the above statement back but for now I offer it up to be schooled otherwise, or not as the case may be.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Maybe some people didn't even realize they had these skills but just "did them" when necessary and didn't feel the need/want to teach these skills in a formalized way?


----------



## JustSomePerson

SaulGoodman said:


> Maybe some people didn't even realize they had these skills but just "did them" when necessary and didn't feel the need/want to teach these skills in a formalized way?


----------



## JowGaWolf

SaulGoodman said:


> Great observations Jowga, sounds like you have an excellent instructor! Was looking at some clips from your system the other day, very nice fluid/flowing art with good footwork and fast hand combinations. The hands in particular don't look disimilair to Wing Chun in some cases, I understand there is a hung gar influence there?


Thanks.  There are very few bad Jow Ga Sifus, thank goodness and most are open minded and don't have big egos which helps.  Many Jow Ga sifu's and instructors talk to Sifu's in other fighting systems as well.  I think Jow Ga has one of the most aggressive foot work systems out there. I'll put it this way. You can give me any Jow Ga form and I can probably show 10+ times of where the footwork will try to break the root of the opponent or where it applies what WC calls "flow of force" to knock the opponent off balance.

You are correct about the Hung gar influence.


----------



## LFJ

Force vector is not a difficult concept to understand. I see good body mechanics in their fights, in their punching. I understand that much just fine, and I'm not objecting to it. Pretty basic stuff.

What Alan demos though, is a skill of manipulating the opponent's balance in a very particular way while striking them. He says this is directly applicable in fighting. This is what we never see.

If it's not seen because as he says, a tough fighter will counter and recounter, then that seems to mean it never actually works considering there are many of their fights online, but no one is able to point to one where it happens.

Feeling it for myself doesn't demonstrate that it ever works in fighting.


----------



## JowGaWolf

JustSomePerson said:


> Hi. Force Flow is technically not 'invisible' if you have the right instrumentation. For example, if I had a very powerful microscope, perhaps electron, you can see, albeit interpreted, a force passing through an object.
> 
> In branches of mathematics 'force flow' would be referred to as a vector and here a force vector. There are some materials that enable one to see the distribution of a load and the force exerted throughout the material.
> 
> For example please see this video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 03:56 is where you see some photoelastic material put under stress and the force flow through it. If your bones were made of this material or other parts of your body you would be able to see the force vectors pass through. Likewise, if you had good instrumentation you could 'see it' pass through bones and flesh too.
> 
> We can either talk physics properly and use the correct terms or choose a half way house such as force flow as most don't do mathematics and physics.
> 
> In sum, yes, to the human eye it is invisible but it is there and I hope to have provided some thoughts that may allow some to understand the idea of force flow a little better.
> 
> Sometimes when we talk about having good structure we are talking about the ratio of a force vector that passes through the skeletal structure as opposed to the more fleshy parts and if your body had the same properties of that photoelastic material, you would be able see how that ratio changes as you position and reposition your body to be more structurally aligned or not.
> 
> It is true, when we have incorrect tension the force vector will distribute to the fleshy parts over the skeletal structure and this is what some people mean by it becoming 'jammed'. There is nothing mystical it is all just science. The issue is always one of articulation and the extent to which some will exploit ignorance here to insert their own frameworks. Others, as stated, attempt a half way house because most folk are not good with overly technical and 'scientific' terminology. 'Reaching/attaining Song' helps prevent 'jamming' in my view and allows one to 'feel' a vector force and to use it more efficiently.
> 
> This is why SLT is so important as one is dealing with just gravity and the ground reaction force and the meditative aspect trains you to attend to the sensations in your body and to identify the force vectors passing through, whilst allowing you to play with body positions to experience changes in that ratio and to reach Song in this very basic mechanical system; gravity and the ground reaction force i.e. just those simple force vectors.
> 
> I hope some find what I write above useful.
> 
> Cheers


When I teach about "force flow"  I usually just use the term energy and force.  Energy is what moves through the body and force is the end result of that energy moving through the body and interacting with an object.  For example, when looking at a jab the power that is being generated to throw the jab is the energy. The exit points of that energy as it strikes an object is the force.  How the energy leaves the fist determines how hard the fists lands. 

My explanation for when a person hits a heavy bag and his wrists collapse: This is because the energy is leaving your wrist and not your fist. When the fist's impact is at an incorrect angle then the majority of that energy continues upon it's natural path which is linear resulting in the folding of the wrist and the continued forward motion of the body and energy. When you watch the a fist collapse in slow motion, you can see that the wrist almost touches the bag.

(a video would probably explain this better)
People who hyper-extend their elbow when jabbing are doing so because that's where the energy is leaving the body. The easiest and safest way to understand this is to put a coin where your elbow bends (bicep side) and pop the coin upward.  The reason the coin pops upward is because the energy is coming out of the elbow. Now drive that energy through your fist and you'll notice that the coin goes forward more than it goes up. The coin travels the same direction as the energy.

In a fighting application the concept can also be applied to being able to detect the energy from your opponent through the force that it causes.  When you get really good at it you'll be able to tell when your opponent is off balance without actually looking at your opponent even if the contact is brief. From experience it's like time slows down and you literally get a mental picture of how your opponent is off balance.  I'm not good at it yet because I can't detect this at will.  To learn this is not a quick learning process.  I requires that you are in tune with your body and that you are paying attention to how your body reacts to objects around you. 

When student do our warm up exercises moving side ways"side hops", running, running backwards, and  "side hops" with rotations, I'll always remind mind them not to just move but to pay attention to how their body is moving, how their muscles are reacting as they move.  I want them to pay attention to everything including to how the foot lands and hit the ground.

Tai Chi trains how to detect small changes in force, being too stiff, too tense, or too loose  will work against you and prevent the ability to feel the changes of force against your body.
I thought Chi Sao purpose was to train similar sensitivity but reflecting back on some of the videos, it seems that this is not the case for many WC practitioners. I think that maybe some practice Chi Sao with too much force. For what I've been able to experience, there is always a smaller force that comes before the larger force.  If you can detect that smaller force then you can tell when the larger force is coming.  This force is even smaller for someone who is off balanced. Try standing on one leg with your eyes closed and arms to the side, while the other leg bent as if you are trying to touch your but with your heel.  You'll feel energy run crazy through your body as you try to maintain balance.  When you can detect that imbalance in another person who is on two legs then everything that I stated above will make more sense.


----------



## JowGaWolf

SaulGoodman said:


> I guess ultimately this is what they call "hidden skills" in CMA? I would be interested to see if a practitioner of an art like Hsing Yi or Bagua has problems grasping "force flow", I suspect not as after reading a lot of material recently on the subject internal arts seem to be familiar with these concepts.


 It's more of a "non-trained skilled" in martial arts.  By "non-trained" I mean it's not trained as application during free sparring.


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> Force vector is not a difficult concept to understand. I see good body mechanics in their fights, in their punching. I understand that much just fine, and I'm not objecting to it. Pretty basic stuff.



Agreed. I don't understand why these basic ideas are made out to be so complex. Basic mechanics, vectors - these things are taught in school to 13 year olds. They aren't difficult to understand. 



LFJ said:


> If it's not seen because as he says, a tough fighter will counter and recounter, then that seems to mean it never actually works considering there are many of their fights online, but no one is able to point to one where it happens.
> 
> Feeling it for myself doesn't demonstrate that it ever works in fighting.



This is correct. If it provides no quantifiable advantage, no effect that can be seen, then what is it for?


----------



## guy b.

Alan Orr said:


> If you are blind to it then not much we can show you.  WSL Wing Chun is not the same as what we do. I know that style well. Its not the same approach. Once you have first hand experience then maybe you will feel the difference



Why wouldn't you be able to describe in simple terms what it is that you are doing differently?

If you know WSL VT well then a simple point by point comparison should be easy.


----------



## guy b.

Alan Orr said:


> You came to a small general class 8 years ago for an hour? So you think you know about our training and level? My guys at the the where fighting MMA and had good success already.



I came to your class to see what you were like. After that I decided that anything else was easier to do without you there.



Alan Orr said:


> Our main training was not in the general beginners class.



I know, you tried to flog that too.



Alan Orr said:


> to listen to some fool on a forum talk down his mma record makes me sick.



I'm not talking down Peter Irving's MMA record. To go mental because someone mentions the reality of his fight record is a bit unbalanced though.


----------



## JustSomePerson

Hello guy_b

I think you are being unfair to Alan. The idea of sequencing is in physiotherapy and more 'western' approaches to bio-mechanics and it is knowledge that is not really on the syllabus that is taught to 13 year olds. It is far more advanced and at a university degree level.

I also say this of force vectors and some of the more complex mechanical processes (lower than degree level depending on complexity of the msystem studied), having taught mathematics in a secondary school context and having written and spoken on the mathematics syllabus and changes to it over the last 50 years of secondary school education. I have also taught at university at a post graduate level.

Yes, the syllabus has been dumbed down but examples of it are out there so one can quite easily compare your statement to facts and I say this with respects to curricular internationally (not just the English speaking world which is very dumbed down). I do, however, agree with some of your points with respects to the clarity of the articulations put forwards of late but knowing the contexts, I view some of those criticisms as a little unfair.

What we find in some of the more esoteric eastern literature are thesis on mechanics that pre-date much of contemporary western thought but given 'imperialism' and a western-centric imperialism at that (waning rapidly), it is understandable that many do not appreciate the teachings of an older kind.

Indeed, with respects to looking at force flow through the human body and even 'qi flow', western perspectives are still only now catching up and where the 'spiral' is only now starting to enter the lexicon in terms of that very 'hard' scientific approach of the western centric mind. Its only recently that instrumentation has been developed to either falsify or verify the teachings of the older generations in esoteric literature and all signs, to date, are pointing towards verification.

I should have written the book I said I was going to write over dropping hints on forums and trying to encourage others to orientate their articulations towards what I view as a more truthful and factual account. If I finish my writings I will post it and offer it up for free and as an anonymous authour because if one is genuine in ones aims and moral and ethical frameworks, that is the correct and right thing to do. We show ourselves through our actions and the means through which we achieve our ends and together, they indicate our initial intent.

Namaste


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> I
> 
> I'm not talking down Peter Irving's MMA record. To go mental because someone mentions the reality of his fight record is a bit unbalanced though.



Uh...you called him a "low to mid" MMA fighter, which is kind of "talking down" I think.  His record seems better than that to me!

Peter Irving MMA Stats, Pictures, News, Videos, Biography - Sherdog.com

http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/interviews/14394-One-to-Watch--Peter-Irving

What's your Pro MMA record Guy?


----------



## SaulGoodman

He talks about people being unbalanced?

What part of :

"Post a credible clip and we can talk. Until then you are nothing and you stink of fear. I would smash you up standing I think. And I would break you to bits on the ground."

Is balanced?


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Post a credible clip and we can talk. Until then you are nothing and you stink of fear. I would smash you up standing I think. And I would break you to bits on the ground



I take it you haven't met Frost, the resident kung fu magazine wing chun troll, and his various aliases. Or maybe you have?


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> I take it you haven't met Frost, the resident kung fu magazine wing chun troll, and his various aliases. Or maybe you have?



Doesn't matter who the comment was directed at.  Sounds a bit "unbalanced" to me regardless!


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Doesn't matter who the comment was directed at.  Sounds a bit "unbalanced" to me regardless!



Sometimes you need to troll a troll. Alan is serously offended that I called Peter Irving low to mid level, which is just silly.


----------



## dudewingchun

guy b. said:


> Sometimes you need to troll a troll. Alan is serously offended that I called Peter Irving low to mid level, which is just silly.



You seem to offend everyone. So maybe it is you ?


----------



## drop bear

KPM said:


> Uh...you called him a "low to mid" MMA fighter, which is kind of "talking down" I think.  His record seems better than that to me!
> 
> Peter Irving MMA Stats, Pictures, News, Videos, Biography - Sherdog.com
> 
> http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/interviews/14394-One-to-Watch--Peter-Irving
> 
> What's your Pro MMA record Guy?



Depends who he has fought and on what promotions. It is England so i wouldn't have a clue.

Fight matrix is a better indicator though.

Fight Matrix |    Fighter Profile : Peter Irving


----------



## SaulGoodman

guy b. said:


> I take it you haven't met Frost, the resident kung fu magazine wing chun troll, and his various aliases. Or maybe you have?


That's pretty funny guy-b, sorry to disappoint but Frost is not my alter ego/secret identity. Rather than comment on YOUR unbalanced hypocrital statement that was aimed at this Frost guy you gloss over and try changing the subject. So come on, would you like to explain what was balanced about the statement that I quoted?


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Sometimes you need to troll a troll. Alan is serously offended that I called Peter Irving low to mid level, which is just silly.



   I think that is rather an "unbalanced" view!


----------



## guy b.

drop bear said:


> Fight Matrix |    Fighter Profile : Peter Irving



Like I said


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Frost is not my alter ego/secret identity



Whoa, don't think I said that? WTF?


----------



## Tames D

dudewingchun said:


> You seem to offend everyone. So maybe it is you ?


He hasn't offended me. I actually agree with most of what he has posted.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Like I said



So what's your pro MMA record guy?


----------



## JustSomePerson

Back on topic, another great video from Alan Orr. I really like the explanation and the way he takes the student through it. Some very good teaching going on here.

'How to Improve punching power in wing chun'


----------



## SaulGoodman

Already waiting for the "that's not how we punch in VT" comments


----------



## guy b.

Hi KPM! Sorry, I mean Saul


----------



## SaulGoodman

JustSomePerson said:


> Back on topic, another great video from Alan Orr. I really like the explanation and the way he takes the student through it. Some very good teaching going on here.
> 
> 'How to Improve punching power in wing chun'


Just watched this clip a couple times. So force flow application isn't just about  physical contact but also how to generate striking power too? That makes a lotta sense to me if that's the case


----------



## LFJ

SaulGoodman said:


> Just watched this clip a couple times. So force flow application isn't just about  physical contact but also how to generate striking power too? That makes a lotta sense to me if that's the case



Force Flow™ in that sense is just a rebranding of one of the most basic WC concepts.


----------



## Phobius

Force Flow is not a trademark.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Phobius said:


> Force Flow is not a trademark.


I didn't say it was! Why are people so confrontational on this the "friendly" forum. I mentioned force flow because that is the method Alan is using to generate striking power in the clip


----------



## mograph

SaulGoodman said:


> I didn't say it was!


LFJ said it was in post #154. Possibly being ironic.

The signal-to-noise ratio in this thread is pretty low.
I wonder what the _unfriendly_ forums are like. Physical challenges and more anger, I guess.


----------



## SaulGoodman

LFJ said:


> Force Flow™ in that sense is just a rebranding of one of the most basic WC concepts.


Not another "oh yeah we do that already and your just giving it a fancy name". From what I've seen so far it's far from "basic", and looks like a trained skill that one has to focus on intentionally. I've studied several different lineages of wing chun and at no time were these things covered. You WSL fanboys seem to think you have it all. The WSL people I have touched hands with were no better or worse than any other lineages I've met. I tell you one thing, from what I've seen from  Alan's clips they certainly did not have the same level of close body control that he displays. I've also seen several clips from his recent seminars where he's played chi Sao with people not from his lineage and he simply blew them away.
 I admit that I don't have "force flow" skills but am open minded enough to study it and hope to get to one of the seminars to feel it first hand


----------



## geezer

Saul, I think "force-flow" *is* something present in all lineages of WC, and in all martial arts. Alan is just showing us ways to use it better.

One thing I particularly liked was when in passing (around 6:26) he referred to releasing power or _fa-jing_ exploding, "like a sneeze". ....Except you don't spray your opponent with snot!  

.... Alan has a gift for explaining and demonstrating this stuff in a very clear, comprehensible and no nonsense sort of way. That's why it so surprises me that some of this comes from Hendricks. Off hand, I'd be hard pressed to think of two people with more sharply contrasting communication styles.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Good biomechanics are/should be present and certain elements of force flow are evident in some Wc. But as a consciously trained component part of training? That's what I meant. I've read his book and it seems that just the fundamental way a lot of Wc practitioners hold and lock their basic horse precludes correct flow. Maybe he or Kpm canhelp on this one?


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> From what I've seen so far it's far from "basic", and looks like a trained skill that one has to focus on intentionally. I've studied several different lineages of wing chun and at no time were these things covered



You didn't learn to generate force in any of the wing chun you studied?

Force delivery is one of the main preoccupations of the system I don't understand how you could have missed it?


----------



## geezer

SaulGoodman said:


> Good biomechanics are/should be present and certain elements of force flow are evident in some Wc. But as a consciously trained component part of training? That's what I meant.



I agree, I haven't seen this material systematically and consciously trained in the other WC branches I've encountered. But it may be there, at least to some degree. Just not so clearly evident looking at it from the outside.

As an example of something similar, I've noticed that in his videos Alan has pointed out a lot of "errors" or counterproductive ways of moving  that are often seen in my core lineage (Leung Ting WT), and I pretty much _agree_ with everything he says ....except that the _better_ people in that "WT" lineage don't actually apply the movements in that "ineffective" way. It's more a matter of a way of training that has gotten misinterpreted over time. So what you see from the outside or at a lower level may not be the whole story ...especially working with a very _traditional_ instructor.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> You didn't learn to generate force in any of the wing chun you studied?
> 
> Force delivery is one of the main preoccupations of the system *I don't understand how you could have missed it? *




Don't_ assume_ that he did. Please don't let an antagonistic communication style get in the way of a productive discussion. Your reply above would have been so much better without the snarky comment in bolded type.


----------



## SaulGoodman

I have guy on ignore but see his comments in relation to my posts when I get thread activity alerts. This guy really does like to assume he knows everything doesn't he? Of course the Wc/wt/EBMAS that I've studied has force generation mechanics, that's a no brainer. But I was never FORMALLY or SYSTEMATICALLY taught what Alan Orr teaches. I guess Guy B is now going to now claim that Phillip Bayer/Gary Lam etc  teach 7 bows/force flow and 6 core elements. Or that all of these skills are automatically attained just by doing correct "VT". How stupid is Alan Orr going through all his training and research when all he had to do was go see Guy B...


----------



## Tony Dismukes

geezer said:


> One thing I particularly liked was when in passing (around 6:26) he referred to releasing power or _fa-jing_ exploding, "like a sneeze". ....Except you don't spray your opponent with snot!


Wait ... we're _not_ supposed to spray people with snot when we practice?

That would explain some of the looks I was getting from the other students in class last week.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Hi KPM! Sorry, I mean Saul



What was that LFJ?.....I mean Guy?


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> I didn't say it was! Why are people so confrontational on this the "friendly" forum. I mentioned force flow because that is the method Alan is using to generate striking power in the clip



I'm pretty sure Phobius was referring to LFJ's inclusion of the little "TM" mark when he spelled "Force Flow" and not your comment Saul.


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> Good biomechanics are/should be present and certain elements of force flow are evident in some Wc. But as a consciously trained component part of training? That's what I meant. I've read his book and it seems that just the fundamental way a lot of Wc practitioners hold and lock their basic horse precludes correct flow. Maybe he or Kpm canhelp on this one?



Good biomechanics are not a given in Wing Chun.  Some have really poor biomechanics.  There is no way anyone is using good transmission of force if they are leaning back in their stance all hunched over in the "Wing Chun slouch" that we see too often.  Absolutely, tilting the hips forward and "locking them in" as some people do is going to impede good use of force.  Especially when you look from the side and their shoulders are on a vertical line behind their hips because they are pushing their hips forward and leaning back so much!   Use of the Kwa is important in handling force.  Purposefully "locking up" the Kwa is counter-productive.  You cannot use "whole body" power if you do this.   People should go back and watch that clip of Ip Chun doing Chi Sau again.   Nothing against Ip Chun.  He is very good at what he does.  But you can clearly see in that clip that it is all arms and no body power.   I do not think these simple things that are good biomechanics are a conscious part of training in a lot of Wing Chun.   Notice I have avoided using the word "forceflow."   That is not what I'm talking about.   When Hendrik talks about forceflow, he is referring to something very specific.  I've tried to equate it to good biomechanics in the past and he just responded that that wasn't it!  I've never trained his forceflow methods and still am not real clear on what he is talking about.  Everyone says it is more easily felt than seen or talked about.

Terminology is a funny thing.  No one talked about "structure" until Robert Chu made a point of it.  Now everyone thinks they have structure.  No one talked about "forceflow" until Hendrik made a point of it.  Now everyone thinks they have "forceflow."   Both terms  obviously mean different things to different people.


----------



## mograph

Tony Dismukes said:


> That would explain some of the looks I was getting from the other students in class last week.


I bow to your superior snot-fu!


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> guess Guy B is now going to now claim that Phillip Bayer/Gary Lam etc teach 7 bows/force flow and 6 core elements. Or that all of these skills are automatically attained just by doing correct "VT".



The standard method in VT is not to teach force generation and body usage by lots of explanation and theory. Direct physical methods are instead used which provide a fully structured and progressive method for development of VT structure, power chain and force delivery. This is a large part of what the system is, and a lot of time is spend on it.


----------



## SaulGoodman

KPM said:


> What was that LFJ?.....I mean Guy?


Guy B really is narcissistic isn't he? He doesn't actually believe you'd go to the trouble of creating 2 profiles just for him? It might be hard for him to accept but Kpm isn't the only person who isn't impressed with guy b's particular brand of "balanced discussion".


----------



## geezer

SaulGoodman said:


> Good biomechanics are/should be present and certain elements of force flow are evident in some Wc. But as a consciously trained component part of training? That's what I meant. I've read his book and it seems that just the fundamental way a lot of Wc practitioners hold and lock their basic horse precludes correct flow. Maybe he or Kpm can help on this one?



I haven't read the book you are referring to. Based on your experience in WT and EBMAS, do you feel the "WT" stance is "locked" in the counterproductive way described? Because, although it may have seemed that way to me back when all I knew was SNT, these days I try to make my waist and torso elastic so that our "springy" energy comes from the whole body. LT always stressed being elastic and springy from your feet al the way up to the tips of your fingers.


----------



## JustSomePerson

geezer said:


> I haven't read the book you are referring to. Based on your experience in WT and EBMAS, do you feel the "WT" stance is "locked" in the counterproductive way described? Because, although it may have seemed that way to me back when all I knew was SNT, these days I try to make my waist and torso elastic so that our "springy" energy comes from the whole body. LT always stressed being elastic and springy from your feet al the way up to the tips of your fingers.



I had a thought prompted by reading your above reply and another elsewhere with respects to teachings successively becoming corrupted and incorrect in some lineages. 

If we accept for a moment that wing chun developed out of a need to train people quickly and that the method of training was tailored towards achieving this end, then why do we see so many folk taking so long to learn? To what extent does wing chun's commercialisation engender a sifu:student dependency for monetary reasons and where progress is so slow?

Perhaps this monetary need and commercialisation plays a very large part in needlessly 'stretching out' the development of a given student? Yes, the qualities of a given student are always factors here but perhaps when we see those methods change or become incorrectly used and taught, the issue of commercialisation in its exploitative sense rears its ugly head?

For the record and given other's comments I think Alan is a very good teacher and does not exploit and that progress is fast attained with his students.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Interesting, well too much emphasis on fast hands and Lat Sao drills. I didn't like the chi Sao "sections" either.., a sort of Spring is evident in some of the higher ranked guys but I found once I started training submission wrestling when we sparred they couldn't hold their positions at all when I worked the clinch and were often reduced to saying "yeah you got me but in the street I could have poked you in the eyes/elbowed you" etc. So in short, fast  hands, poor base. I reached biu tze level and left wt soon after.


----------



## geezer

JustSomePerson said:


> To what extent does wing chun's commercialisation engender a sifu:student dependency for monetary reasons and where progress is so slow?
> 
> Perhaps this *monetary need and commercialisation plays a very large part in needlessly 'stretching out' the development of a given student?*



There can be no doubt that this is true. And I _don't _think it's a problem exclusive to "modern" or "westernized" culture. I've heard that plenty of old-time, traditional Chinese sifus dragged out the training of their students for years and avoided giving out knowledge too freely for monetary reasons and fear of "breaking their rice bowl".

On the other hand, my old Chinese sifu told us frankly that the WC necessary to fight well could be taught fairly quickly, but real skill and finesse in WC, like anything else worthwhile, took a very long time to develop.


----------



## drop bear

geezer said:


> There can be no doubt that this is true. And I _don't _think it's a problem exclusive to "modern" or "westernized" culture. I've heard that plenty of old-time, traditional Chinese sifus dragged out the training of their students for years and avoided giving out knowledge too freely for monetary reasons and fear of "breaking their rice bowl".
> 
> On the other hand, my old Chinese sifu told us frankly that the WC necessary to fight well could be taught fairly quickly, but real skill and finesse in WC, like anything else worthwhile, took a very long time to develop.



What knowledge are they keeping though?

I mean if you have hidden away some advanced move then you are not really hiding anything useful. You can towel people up with basics done well.

(Thank you Connor McGregor rear naked choke)

If you are hiding away important pieces of fundamental basics then you are worthless as an instructor anyway.


----------



## drop bear

SaulGoodman said:


> Interesting, well too much emphasis on fast hands and Lat Sao drills. I didn't like the chi Sao "sections" either.., a sort of Spring is evident in some of the higher ranked guys but I found once I started training submission wrestling when we sparred they couldn't hold their positions at all when I worked the clinch and were often reduced to saying "yeah you got me but in the street I could have poked you in the eyes/elbowed you" etc. So in short, fast  hands, poor base. I reached biu tze level and left wt soon after.



Yeah.  But regardless of how you get there. (and i still don't get this force flow stuff) being good at submission wrestling is all about good structure.

Clinch work is one of the best tests for the style of functional strength being discussed here.


----------



## SaulGoodman

I spend as much time (sometimes more time) these days hand fighting/pummeling as chi Sao.


----------



## drop bear

JustSomePerson said:


> I had a thought prompted by reading your above reply and another elsewhere with respects to teachings successively becoming corrupted and incorrect in some lineages.
> 
> If we accept for a moment that wing chun developed out of a need to train people quickly and that the method of training was tailored towards achieving this end, then why do we see so many folk taking so long to learn? To what extent does wing chun's commercialisation engender a sifu:student dependency for monetary reasons and where progress is so slow?
> 
> Perhaps this monetary need and commercialisation plays a very large part in needlessly 'stretching out' the development of a given student? Yes, the qualities of a given student are always factors here but perhaps when we see those methods change or become incorrectly used and taught, the issue of commercialisation in its exploitative sense rears its ugly head?
> 
> For the record and given other's comments I think Alan is a very good teacher and does not exploit and that progress is fast attained with his students.



Modern martial arts is catered towards lazyness and short attention spans. 

Coming from a mma perspective we have a whole room full of guys who are legitimately scared they will get bashed by a guy because they are putting more effort into training than we are. 

And they get good fast.


----------



## drop bear

SaulGoodman said:


> I spend as much time (sometimes more time) these days hand fighting/pummeling as chi Sao.



It is almost the same thing isnt it?

Conceptually.

Edit. 

The more i think about it.  The more i think clinch work should be a fundimental part of chun.


----------



## SaulGoodman

drop bear said:


> It is almost the same thing isnt it?
> 
> Conceptually.


Very much so, and conceptually much easier to understand. Guys can work pummeling then learn to transition into arm drags/whizzers/shoots from this framework VERY quickly. Just a brilliant, functional sensitivity drill.


----------



## Phobius

A lot of good points here now. Me personally feel this is a very good reason for cross training. In fact it is not only condoned by our sifu but practically enforced at higher levels.

We expect to master the world of martial arts and yet so many people think they sit on some secret that does not exist elsewhere. Now imagine when learning that the secret techniques are no other than mastering and finally understanding the basic techniques / principles. Now learn those of other arts and find ways it can not improve your art but improve you.

So often we hear martial artists talk about their art being so great, missing the fact that their art is a teaching system, they themselves are the end result. Master the art to become a good teacher, master yourself to become a good martial artist. One is sadly not always equal to the other.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Being exposed to other arts will make you view Wc in a different light. A good thing.


----------



## dudewingchun

The more I learn grappling the more it helps my Wing chun imo


----------



## guy b.

drop bear said:


> It is almost the same thing isnt it?
> 
> Conceptually.
> 
> Edit.
> 
> The more i think about it.  The more i think clinch work should be a fundimental part of chun.



Pummeling and other styles of grip fighting have a function diametrically opposed to that of chi sau in VT. Chi sau is about training habits for hitting. The pummeling drill is about the importance of inside control and leverage in grappling.

Chi sau teaches the striker elbow usage and structure for unattached hitting. Pummeling teaches the wrestler to seek underhooks and close body contact.

Understanding chi sau in this way..is likely to lead to errors.


----------



## SaulGoodman

guy b. said:


> Pummeling and other styles of grip fighting have a function diametrically opposed to that of chi sau in VT. Chi sau is about training habits for hitting. The pummeling drill is about the importance of inside control and leverage in grappling.
> 
> Chi sau teaches the striker elbow usage and structure for unattached hitting. Pummeling teaches the wrestler to seek underhooks and close body contact.
> 
> Understanding chi sau in this way..is likely to lead to errors.



*I thought I'd show ignored content, I wish I hadn't...*

*So how long have you been studying submission wrestling for? Because your observations on what pummellings purpose is are pretty short sighted. Pummelling dovetails beautifully with chi Sao.*

"The pummeling drill is about the importance of inside control and leverage in grappling."

*So your chi Sao DOESNT help with this? Now you're just being provocative.*

*So are you now gonna say wc doesn't work in clinch range? Please...*



"Chi sau teaches the striker elbow usage and structure for unattached hitting" 
*ah, the ol invincible immovable "vt" elbow. *

*So presumably you don't seek to control the opponent in any way while you are hitting them?

Oops, of course I forgot, your "vt" elbows take care of all that.*


*There seems to be 2 camps here, the  unattached  hitters vs the attached hitters. I know through experience that attached hitting is a far safer place to fight from and leads to less trading.*


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> *I thought I'd show ignored content, I wish I hadn't...*



Please, if you wish you hadn't seen a comment from me then just don't respond. Ignoring completely will save you the pain of typing long replies to something you wish you had never set eyes on.

KPM can re-state your post and I will reply to him if he is interested


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> *I thought I'd show ignored content, I wish I hadn't...*
> 
> *So how long have you been studying submission wrestling for? Because your observations on what pummellings purpose is are pretty short sighted. Pummelling dovetails beautifully with chi Sao.*
> 
> "The pummeling drill is about the importance of inside control and leverage in grappling."
> 
> *So your chi Sao DOESNT help with this? Now you're just being provocative.*
> 
> *So are you now gonna say wc doesn't work in clinch range? Please...*
> 
> 
> 
> "Chi sau teaches the striker elbow usage and structure for unattached hitting"
> *ah, the ol invincible immovable "vt" elbow. *
> 
> *So presumably you don't seek to control the opponent in any way while you are hitting them?
> 
> Oops, of course I forgot, your "vt" elbows take care of all that.*
> 
> 
> *There seems to be 2 camps here, the  unattached  hitters vs the attached hitters. I know through experience that attached hitting is a far safer place to fight from and leads to less trading.*



Sad to see that you are having trouble with the quote function, just like KPM. Thank god the problem doesn't seem to have affected anyone else.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Sad to see that you are having trouble with the quote function, just like KPM. Thank god the problem doesn't seem to have affected anyone else.



I had no problem reading Saul's post.  You are having trouble?  So you can't figure what people have written and you can't seem to follow the flow of a discussion.  You've studied Wing Chun but don't know what a "bridge" is, and have to have it explained to you multiple times.......Hmmmm......


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> *There seems to be 2 camps here, the  unattached  hitters vs the attached hitters. I know through experience that attached hitting is a far safer place to fight from and leads to less trading.*



Very true.  I think it has become abundantly clear that both LFJ and Guy view WSLVT as a completely different system than ANY other Wing Chun.  They view the forms differently than anyone else, they view Chi Sau differently than anyone else, the view fighting strategy differently from anyone else, heck....my Pin Sun Wing Chun is more similar to standard Ip Man Wing Chun than what they describe!  I think that is why we have such a disconnect in so many conversations here.  We really should assume they are talking about a completely different system....like talking to Jow Ga Wolf about Jow Ga.....or to Tony Dismukes about BJJ.  But likewise, they shouldn't be critical of what others say about Wing Chun, because others will be talking about a completely different system than their WSLVT.  So I propose from now on that anytime they write "VT"....see as "TV"....and something completely unrelated to what we do.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> I had no problem reading Saul's post.  You are having trouble?  So you can't figure what people have written and you can't seem to follow the flow of a discussion.  You've studied Wing Chun but don't know what a "bridge" is, and have to have it explained to you multiple times.......Hmmmm......



I can follow it. Just sympathising with poor Saul who seems to be afflicted with the same quote function problem as you. Browser settings I expect. I'm just glad that it hasn't affected anyone else on the forum.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> You've studied Wing Chun but don't know what a "bridge" is, and have to have it explained to you multiple times.......Hmmmm



I know what a bridge is to me. I usually ask people to clarify because often it means something completely different to them.


----------



## SaulGoodman

If I had only done 1 lineage of wing chun his arguments might be more compelling, but having trained in multiple lineages to a reasonably high level and dabbled in many others I have to say that both his and LFJ's views fly in the face of how many lineages see and train WC. Does this mean WSLVT is always right and all of us mere mortals are always wrong? Of course not. Conversely are we always right and are they always wrong? Of course not! But these guys seem to always err on the side of them being way more enlightened than the rest of us. 
It just creates animosity and bad feeling rather than a positive enjoyable forum experience. I don't mind conflicting views to my own but not when they are put across in the patronizing, arrogant manner these individuals always seem to do.

Maybe it's all part of the WSLVT training culture?


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> I can follow it. Just sympathising with poor Saul who seems to be afflicted with the same quote function problem as you. Browser settings I expect. I'm just glad that it hasn't affected anyone else on the forum.



Oh I see!  You just like to complain and be argumentative!


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> I know what a bridge is to me. I usually ask people to clarify because often it means something completely different to them.



Interesting though that, even after you ask and it IS clarified, you feel the need to keep asking!  Must be that argumentative thing again!


----------



## guy b.

Sorry KPM, I just find it difficult to remember your particular preferences. There isn't much coherent direction in these threads.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Oh I see!  You just like to complain and be argumentative!



Why is sympathising with Saul's quote function problem being argumentative?


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> I can follow it. Just sympathising with poor Saul who seems to be afflicted with the same quote function problem as you. Browser settings I expect. I'm just glad that it hasn't affected anyone else on the forum.



Actually, it has affected me too! The multi-quote function doesn't work on my computer at work. And we are not supposed to monkey with the settings ...or even be posting on forums, although everybody does it on their prep times, etc. So I can't make any snarky comments. I think KPM's and Saul's use of _italics_ or *bolded* type to differentiate between quotes and responses is perfectly adequate.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> Why is sympathising with Saul's quote function problem being argumentative?



It _was_ a snarky comment. And funny. Made me laugh, anyway. Carry on.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> Pummeling and other styles of grip fighting have a function *diametrically opposed* to that of chi sau in VT. Chi sau is about training habits for hitting. The pummeling drill is about the importance of inside control and leverage in grappling.
> 
> Chi sau teaches the striker elbow usage and structure for unattached hitting. Pummeling teaches the wrestler to seek underhooks and close body contact.
> 
> Understanding chi sau in this way..is likely to lead to errors.



I don't believe the functions of pummeling and chi-sau are diametrically opposed. I rather see them as distinct, and even, perhaps, complementary. Chi-sau is just a drill after all. I would think that it can profitably be trained one way for the striking range and somewhat differently as you approach the clinch. Then all kinds of wicked fun becomes possible.

Just think about how WSL-VT Sifu Wang Zhi Peng goes from VT chi-sau directly into throws (1:25-1:50 in the following clip):


----------



## LFJ

geezer said:


> Actually, it has affected me too! The multi-quote function doesn't work on my computer at work. And we are not supposed to monkey with the settings ...



What? You have a different version of the message board? 

Anyone can just type the code as below, without spaces, around the quoted text. Easy.

[ quote ] insert text here [ /quote ]

I think KPM was just doing his own thing to be unique and stand out for some reason.

When you asked him to try italicizing the text he's quoting, he had to italicize _his_ text instead.

I mean, he can do whatever makes him feel special, but it's just a little weird.


----------



## SaulGoodman

geezer said:


> I don't believe the functions of pummeling and chi-sau are diametrically opposed. I rather see them as distinct, and even, perhaps, complementary. Chi-sau is just a drill after all. I would think that it can profitably be trained one way for the striking range and somewhat differently as you approach the clinch. Then all kinds of wicked fun becomes possible.
> 
> Just think about how WSL-VT Sifu Wang Zhi Peng goes from VT chi-sau directly into throws (1:25-1:50 in the following clip):


I blend the two all the time, works fine


----------



## wtxs

geezer said:


> I don't believe the functions of pummeling and chi-sau are diametrically opposed. I rather see them as distinct, and even, perhaps, complementary. Chi-sau is just a drill after all. I would think that it can profitably be trained one way for the striking range and somewhat differently as you approach the clinch. Then all kinds of wicked fun becomes possible.
> 
> Just think about how WSL-VT Sifu Wang Zhi Peng goes from VT chi-sau directly into throws (1:25-1:50 in the following clip):



This cat (assumed high ranking) and others are from WSL lineage, if chi sau is for training the elbow/structure and punch, he's wasting too much time and energy with all that chasing hand/body/leg.  I guess he didn't pay enough to get some of that secret sauce. 

Just wondering what happened to the end goal of unattached type of fighting we been hearing about?  Don't see any of that in the video, however I do get the throwing techniques are added on and I dig it.


----------



## SaulGoodman

You'll probably be told that the instructor doesn't have the "real vt" skills. Jai Harman is in this clip and is a good guy, rather than patronize people about his WSL skills he puts them to the test pretty regularly (there's a few good clips out there).


----------



## drop bear

SaulGoodman said:


> You'll probably be told that the instructor doesn't have the "real vt" skills. Jai Harman is in this clip and is a good guy, rather than patronize people about his WSL skills he puts them to the test pretty regularly (there's a few good clips out there).



Not a fan of jai.  He puts his chun skills to the test against beginners. 

Which in my view is a cheap way to promote yourself.


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> What? You have a different version of the message board?
> 
> Anyone can just type the code as below, without spaces, around the quoted text. Easy.
> 
> [ quote ] insert text here [ /quote ]
> 
> I think KPM was just doing his own thing to be unique and stand out for some reason.
> 
> When you asked him to try italicizing the text he's quoting, he had to italicize _his_ text instead.
> 
> I mean, he can do whatever makes him feel special, but it's just a little weird.




   I'm glad you are so concerned for me LFJ!   I followed Geezer's recommendation of italicizing.  I didn't actually notice whether he was referring to my text or the person I was responding to's text.  Does it really make that much difference to you?  And for the record, the multi-quote function has never worked for me for some reason.


----------



## SaulGoodman

The beginners observation is a common criticism of his clips. Just because he does well against some of the people doesn't necessarily mean they are out and out beginners. It's conceivable that they may have a fair amount of traditional training under their belts and just don't have the same amount of practical experience as Jai. In none of the clips I've seen does he overdo things if they are indeed beginners. Do we have any concrete evidence giving the background of his opponents to back up the beginners claim? My understanding is that most of the bouts are challenge matches and he stepped up to represent his school and Sifu. Nothing deplorable about that.


----------



## guy b.

wtxs said:


> This cat (assumed high ranking) and others are from WSL lineage, if chi sau is for training the elbow/structure and punch, he's wasting too much time and energy with all that chasing hand/body/leg.  I guess he didn't pay enough to get some of that secret sauce.
> 
> Just wondering what happened to the end goal of unattached type of fighting we been hearing about?  Don't see any of that in the video, however I do get the throwing techniques are added on and I dig it.



You think the throwing is part of his VT? 

I think a good advert for why not to train grappling via VT. Train grappling as grappling. Train VT as VT


----------



## geezer

KPM said:


> I'm glad you are so concerned for me LFJ!   I followed Geezer's recommendation of italicizing.  I didn't actually notice whether he was referring to my text or the person I was responding to's text.  Does it really make that much difference to you?  And for the record, the multi-quote function has never worked for me for some reason.



That's because you are backwards and don't emphasize proper elbow position when clicking the "quote" button.

As for the use of_ italics, _they are typically used instead of quotation marks to indicate the quoted text, as well as occasionally being used for added emphasis similar to using bolded type. Yes, as Saul noted a while back, Guy B. does express himself well with the written word. It's just that sometimes he uses this skill a bit maliciously. Ask Saul. There is _no dearth_ of examples!


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> I rather see them as distinct, and even, perhaps, complementary. Chi-sau is just a drill after all. I would think that it can profitably be trained one way for the striking range and somewhat differently as you approach the clinch. Then all kinds of wicked fun becomes possible.



It could be trained any number of ways, and it is. But what would be the goal of integrating chi sau and pummeling from a VT perspective? 



geezer said:


> Just think about how WSL-VT Sifu Wang Zhi Peng goes from VT chi-sau directly into throws (1:25-1:50 in the following clip):



What do you think this is developing?


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> It could be trained any number of ways, and it is. But what would be the goal of integrating chi sau and pummeling from a VT perspective? ...What do you think this is developing?



What would be the goal of integrating chi-sau at the striking range with pummeling or close-range chi-sau leading into grapples, locks and throws?  Hmmmm.... perhaps the ability to sense and exploit your opponent's weaknesses, control his balance, and use punches, locks, and throws as the opportunity arises.

What is this developing? How about _ti, da, shuai, na_   ...or in plain English, a more complete range of options for kicking butt. 



BTW for a longer weapons range, of course there is within WC the _chi kwun_ exercises, but for shorter weapons, I also enjoy practicing passing drills and a bit of modified _hubad-lubad_ from my Escrima training. I say _modified _because I have left out certain movements that I don't feel are compatible with my WC. The stuff I do integrates very nicely at the conceptual level ...at least in _my_ WC lineage.


----------



## JowGaWolf

SaulGoodman said:


> I blend the two all the time, works fine


Those are shuai jiao throwing techniques.  They are not techniques specific to the Ving Tsun. The VT may set up the throw, but the throw is definitely Shuai Jiao.  Shuai Jiao skills sets are good to have because the grappling fits well with the concept of striking which is to "not be on the ground."  Unlike BJJ it's find to be on the ground but with striking art's it's better to remain standing and strike your opponent while they are on the ground.  I'm hoping to had Shuai Jiao to my skill sets as well, even thought Jow Ga has grappling techniques, I like how Shuai Jiao works in that the goal isn't to take the fight  to the ground.


----------



## drop bear

SaulGoodman said:


> The beginners observation is a common criticism of his clips. Just because he does well against some of the people doesn't necessarily mean they are out and out beginners. It's conceivable that they may have a fair amount of traditional training under their belts and just don't have the same amount of practical experience as Jai. In none of the clips I've seen does he overdo things if they are indeed beginners. Do we have any concrete evidence giving the background of his opponents to back up the beginners claim? My understanding is that most of the bouts are challenge matches and he stepped up to represent his school and Sifu. Nothing deplorable about that.



They are not real shows. They are vehicles for first time fighters. This guy Kane is his second fight after Less than a year training. The guy also took out a white belt bjj comp. Not an instructor just a goober off the street.






Kai has not participated in an actual event yet. So when Jai achieves what this guy has done in a year with no real fanfare at all. Then we can suggest Jai is the good oil.


----------



## SaulGoodman

drop bear said:


> They are not real shows. They are vehicles for first time fighters. This guy Kane is his second fight after Less than a year training. The guy also took out a white belt bjj comp. Not an instructor just a goober off the street.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kai has not participated in an actual event yet. So when Jai achieves what this guy has done in a year with no real fanfare at all. Then we can suggest Jai is the good oil.



I don't understand your animosity to Jai. I don't know him, but the clips I've seen sparring/fighting at his kwoon look ok. Just because someone hasn't taken part in an mma event doesn't mean they can't fight. I love mma and it's certainly the closest approximation to real fighting (with rules) that you can get but please don't start with the "if you ain't been in the cage you can't fight" stuff. It's been done to death.


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> I don't understand your animosity to Jai.



I am glad that you like the VT of Wang Zhi Peng


----------



## wtxs

guy b. said:


> You think the throwing is part of his VT?



I like to give people the benefit of doubt, however it seems others are right about you ... you _*do*_ have an reading and comprehension issue.

Please go back and read  my post again, and pay attention to the part that I said "*I do get the throwing techniques are added on*".

Since he had added throwing to his VT arsenal, it _*becomes*_ part of *his* VT ... any more question?

The better question is, why do you care if throwing is part of his VT?   Be happy and continue to do what you've been doing.


----------



## Xue Sheng

guy b. said:


> I am glad that you like the VT of Wang Zhi Peng



Admittedly I have not been following this train wreck of a thread all that close, but I have to ask..... how the heck did Wang Zhi Peng get into this


----------



## Vajramusti

Xue Sheng said:


> Admittedly I have not been following this train wreck of a thread all that close, but I have to ask..... how the heck did Wang Zhi Peng get into this


------------------------------------------------------
On following recent threads:
Never ask for whom the bell tolls- it tolls for thee!<g>


----------



## KPM

wtxs said:


> I like to give people the benefit of doubt, however it seems others are right about you ... you _*do*_ have an reading and comprehension issue.
> 
> Please go back and read  my post again, and pay attention to the part that I said "*I do get the throwing techniques are added on*".
> 
> Since he had added throwing to his VT arsenal, it _*becomes*_ part of *his* VT ... any more question?
> 
> The better question is, why do you care if throwing is part of his VT?   Be happy and continue to do what you've been doing.



I think we have established on more than one occasion that Guy sometimes has problems with his reading comprehension skills!


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> I think we have established on more than one occasion that Guy sometimes has problems with his reading comprehension skills!



I just don't read parts that appear to be repitition, insults, trolling, narcissism, talking to yourself, etc. I can't spare the time to make a meticulous archive of the sayings of KPM, sorry. I do my best, but you do generate a lot of words with a very low signal to noise ratio.

Maybe if you tighten up a bit it will be possible to converse more effectively?


----------



## guy b.

wtxs said:


> pay attention



Sincere apologies


----------



## drop bear

SaulGoodman said:


> I don't understand your animosity to Jai. I don't know him, but the clips I've seen sparring/fighting at his kwoon look ok. Just because someone hasn't taken part in an mma event doesn't mean they can't fight. I love mma and it's certainly the closest approximation to real fighting (with rules) that you can get but please don't start with the "if you ain't been in the cage you can't fight" stuff. It's been done to death.



His claim to fame is that he has been in the cage.  And tested his chun. 

He is the guy that fought everyone and made chun practical.

If i went round and mma,d a bunch of white belts from other styles to say i have tested it. You should rightly come back and say fight someone good.


----------



## guy b.

drop bear said:


> His claim to fame is that he has been in the cage.  And tested his chun.
> 
> He is the guy that fought everyone and made chun practical.
> 
> If i went round and mma,d a bunch of white belts from other styles to say i have tested it. You should rightly come back and say fight someone good.



I think you are overstating this. Sure he has posted some clips with titles that are a bit hyperbolic. All of his clips are vs low level opposition. I don't think the target audience is MMA fans becaus these people will immediately be able to tell what they are watching and will not be interested.

I think it is promotional material for the wing chun audience. JH is obviously interested in building an image, presumably because he wants to make a living from teaching VT at some point. If you compare it to other material aimed at that audience then it is fine- real opponents, real contact, some risk of defeat. He isn't stating a disclaimer on the clips to the effect that all of the people involved are low level, but neither is he pretending to be a champion full contact fighter. Anyone that believes he is has problems perceiving reality. It is what it is.


----------



## drop bear

guy b. said:


> I think you are overstating this. Sure he has posted some clips with titles that are a bit hyperbolic. All of his clips are vs low level opposition. I don't think the target audience is MMA fans becaus these people will immediately be able to tell what they are watching and will not be interested.
> 
> I think it is promotional material for the wing chun audience. JH is obviously interested in building an image, presumably because he wants to make a living from teaching VT at some point. If you compare it to other material aimed at that audience then it is fine- real opponents, real contact, some risk of defeat. He isn't stating a disclaimer on the clips to the effect that all of the people involved are low level, but neither is he pretending to be a champion full contact fighter. Anyone that believes he is has problems perceiving reality. It is what it is.



The wing chun audience eat this up. With no understanding of the level he actually is. For me that is false branding. Fighters do this all the time as well. They bash chumps to create a better profile for themselves.

And I am not a fan of that either.


----------



## guy b.

drop bear said:


> The wing chun audience eat this up. With no understanding of the level he actually is. For me that is false branding. Fighters do this all the time as well. They bash chumps to create a better profile for themselves.
> 
> And I am not a fan of that either.



I am more of the opinion that as long as the truth is available, it is the fault of the individual if they don't bother to find it. Jai Harman isn't hiding anything. A few moments on google will provide enough facts. If people choose to deceive themselves, well then that is their problem.


----------



## dudewingchun

That guy most definitely is not a good example of " MMA". He didn't even know how to throw a jab.


----------



## KPM

Here is a more recent video of Jai Harmon sparring:






Here is a picture of WSLVT Chi Sau/Lop Sau training:






So since a similar question has been asked about videos of Alan Orr training and videos of Alan Orr's guys sparring, I think it is only fair to apply a similar question here......why don't  we see any of the things from WSLVT Chi Sau showing up in a WSLVT guy sparring/fighting?


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> So since a similar question has been asked about videos of Alan Orr training and videos of Alan Orr's guys sparring, I think it is only fair to apply a similar question here......why don't  we see any of the things from WSLVT Chi Sau showing up in a WSLVT guy sparring/fighting?



Already answered you 7 pages ago. Quit trolling.

Recent Video by Alan Orr


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> why don't we see any of the things from WSLVT Chi Sau showing up in a WSLVT guy sparring



Because WSL VT chi sau is a drill and not directly related to fighting application. Apparently this is not the case for other wing chun systems. This is why questions are asked about what the Force Flow TM chi sau is training, or why you would wish to form arm contacts in fighting, for example.

In the case of Force Flow TM, if it is training to bounce people around and supposed to work from an arm contact situation then it is fair to ask why we do not see this in fighting. If you don't like such questions then don't claim that your chi sau is directly related to fighting application, that you train arm contact applications, that you fight from a training stance, and so on.


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> Already answered you 7 pages ago. Quit trolling.
> 
> Recent Video by Alan Orr



You are correct, this is trolling. I wonder if KPM will revert to pictures of WSL doing a tan shape soon?


----------



## LFJ

Plus, Jai calls himself a "_Wing Chun/Freestyle MA guy_" in the description. 

KPM should be able to recognize that he was not using VT at all in those clips. He was doing whatever his "Freestyle MA" is. Pretty sure most beginners would be able to tell that much.

Poor attempt at trolling.


----------



## SaulGoodman

KPM, you're wasting you're time arguing with the VT tm fanboys. You're just giving them a platform to spout their boring rhetoric from. They have their interpretation of Wing Chun and we have ours, and ne'r the twain shall meet I'm afraid. They have an arrogance that will always put people's backs up, and based on the VT tm people I've met and seen, it's unfounded. I've met these kind of guys before, even after touching hands and giving them a good spanking they will tell you that the only reason you bested them was because you weren't using "VING TSUN" and had to go outside of the system. 
Or the classic line from VT tm  "master" Kevin Gledhill after Shawn Obasi ragged him all over the place,  "that's not OUR chi Sao". What happened to being able to adapt the VT tm non-application based training to someone not playing their game?


----------



## LFJ

SaulGoodman said:


> They have their interpretation of Wing Chun and we have ours



You share interpretations with KPM? Because you are KPM?

You talk about the other forum history, but no one knows you and you're using the name of a character from Breaking Bad. 

Trolling is an unacceptable behavior on this forum, KPM aka "SaulGoodman".


----------



## geezer

LFJ said:


> You share interpretations with KPM? Because you are KPM?



Are you beginning to see KPM everywhere now?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/s1_LZ6d_D7w/maxresdefault.jpg

Take a deep breath and remember paranoia will destroy ya.


----------



## drop bear

KPM said:


> Here is a more recent video of Jai Harmon sparring:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a picture of WSLVT Chi Sau/Lop Sau training:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So since a similar question has been asked about videos of Alan Orr training and videos of Alan Orr's guys sparring, I think it is only fair to apply a similar question here......why don't  we see any of the things from WSLVT Chi Sau showing up in a WSLVT guy sparring/fighting?



Because boxers wing chun better.

OThere are just more of them applying the principles at a higher level.

And there are principles of fighting that can be pretty consistant.

(exept for when they are not)

By the way look at amateur boxing it is a bit more chun like.


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> You share interpretations with KPM? Because you are KPM?
> 
> You talk about the other forum history, but no one knows you and you're using the name of a character from Breaking Bad.
> 
> Trolling is an unacceptable behavior on this forum, KPM aka "SaulGoodman".



Sorry.  You are totally off-base.   Saul is his own man.  His reference about "our" interpretations refers only to the fact that you have singled WSLVT out as being so different than all other Wing Chun.  At least that's how I took his meaning.  And maybe he was using a different "log on" name in the other forum....I don't know.


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> Are you beginning to see KPM everywhere now?
> 
> https://i.ytimg.com/vi/s1_LZ6d_D7w/maxresdefault.jpg
> 
> Take a deep breath and remember paranoia will destroy ya.



Needs investigated by the moderators. IP check would be a good start.


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> Already answered you 7 pages ago. Quit trolling.
> 
> Recent Video by Alan Orr



Not trolling at all.  If such heavy criticism is going to be applied to Alan Orr's work, I thought "turn about" was only "fair play"!!
Here is the answer you gave earlier in this thread:

*This force flow thing is said to be used directly in fighting. The end goal is to be able to manipulate the opponent's body and balance while striking them. But it never happens.

Training drills in WSLVT are abstract, not meant to be used directly in fighting. We train pun-sau to develop the punch. Pun-sau doesn't happen in fighting, but punching obviously does. There's no disconnect between what we say we use in fighting, and what is actually used.*

I understand perfectly that Chi Sau is not fighting and you don't expect to see Chi Sau in free-sparring.  But you did say that things trained in Chi Sau were for use in sparring and fighting.  Let's see...what all did you mention....elbow position, proper cycling, structure, removing obstacles.....what else?   Where do we see these things in the Jai Harmon videos?  Because if it is ONLY about training to punch....you guys sure go about it in a strange and inefficient way! 

Jai's elbows looked flaired outward quite a bit to me.   I don't see him using any of the "clearing the line" things we see in PB's example of WSLVT Chi Sau and Lop Sau.  And beginner can do rapid chain punching. And in this latest video Jai may be including a tag of "freestyle MMA", but he certainly didn't in those earlier videos.   And....I pointed out earlier that almost all of the sparring videos of Alan Orr's guys was in an MMA setting and that didn't seem to make any difference to the discussion then, so why should a "free-style MMA" tag make any difference now? 

I'm not trying to bring criticism down on Jai Harmon at all.  He looks like a good fighter!  And he looks like he is doing a lot of the things that Alan Orr and his guys do!  I'm sure Alan would approve!   I'm only pointing out that if someone is going to bring a critical eye on CSL Wing  Chun via Alan's vids, the same kind of critical analysis should be applied to WSLVT.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Needs investigated by the moderators. IP check would be a good start.



Investigate all you want.  One could just as easily assume that Guy B. and LFJ were the same person.  I don't think I'm the only one that gets confused about which of you said  what!  You are relatively interchangeable!


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Sorry.  You are totally off-base.   Saul is his own man.  His reference about "our" interpretations refers only to the fact that you have singled WSLVT out as being so different than all other Wing Chun.  At least that's how I took his meaning.  And maybe he was using a different "log on" name in the other forum....I don't know.



There weren't many people on the other forum. Most are here. If one is using an alternaive identity to troll this forum then moderators checking IP addresses would be a quick way to identify who it is.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> And in this latest video Jai may be including a tag of "freestyle MMA", but he certainly didn't in those earlier videos. And....I pointed out earlier that almost all of the sparring videos of Alan Orr's guys was in an MMA setting and that didn't seem to make any difference to the discussion then, so why should a "free-style MMA" tag make any difference now?



Because Alan's team are using their wing chun in their fighting. JH is not.

I have no connection with JH and have no idea about his ability in VT, but VT in a fight does not look like that.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> There weren't many people on the other forum. Most are here. If one is using an alternaive identity to troll this forum then moderators checking IP addresses would be a quick way to identify who it is.



 Why do you think anyone is trolling?  Saul has had good input here.  And so what if he used a different "log on" name in a different forum.  That's no crime.  You can check anything you want.  But you'd be wasting your time.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

guy b. said:


> Because WSL VT chi sau is a drill and not directly related to fighting application.


Will it be better to spend your valuable training time in "fighting application drills" instead? If you can't use whatever that you have trained in your daily drills, you may need to modify it. Can you apply your Chi Shou skill if your arm only has 1/4 second to contact on your opponent's arm?

Train as you fight = kill 2 birds with 1 stone


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Because Alan's team are using their wing chun in their fighting. JH is not.
> .



I bet Jai Harmon would disagree!!!  But that's an easy cop out, isn't it?  When the criticism comes back on WSLVT you simply say..."but that's not real WSLVT!"


----------



## drop bear

I am saul, chris parker, tez and Jesus.

Full disclosure.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Why do you think anyone is trolling?  Saul has had good input here.  And so what if he used a different "log on" name in a different forum.  That's no crime.  You can check anything you want.  But you'd be wasting your time.



I can't check anything.


----------



## guy b.

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Will it be better to spend your valuable training time in "fighting application drills" instead? If you can't use whatever that you have trained in your daily drills, you may need to modify it. Can you apply your Chi Shou skill if your arm only has 1/4 second to contact on your opponent's arm?
> 
> Train as you fight = kill 2 birds with 1 stone



VT doesn't work that way. That isn't an argument about which way is better, just a statement of the facts


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> I bet Jai Harmon would disagree!!!  But that's an easy cop out, isn't it?  When the criticism comes back on WSLVT you simply say..."but that's not real WSLVT!"



I have no information about Jai Harman and so defending his position (or otherwise) would be folly on my part. WSL VT doesn't look like that in a fight though. That looked more ike boxing or kickboxing.


----------



## wckf92

guy b. said:


> ...but VT in a fight does not look like that.



So what does VT look like in a fight?


----------



## wckf92

guy b. said:


> WSL VT doesn't look like that in a fight though.



What does it look like then? (VT I mean)


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> VT doesn't work that way. That isn't an argument about which way is better, just a statement of the facts



You don't fight the way your train, nor train the way you fight?  Doesn't sound very efficient to me!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

guy b. said:


> VT doesn't work that way. That isn't an argument about which way is better, just a statement of the facts


I don't understand your argument here. The following can be how WC may look in a fight.

- Your opponent is on guard.
- You move in and use your left WC Tang Shou to deflect his right arm away from his head to open his face,
- You then right punch at his face.
- If your opponent uses his left hand to interrupt your right punch,
- You change your right punch into WC Bong Shou and use it to protect the right side of your head.
- You then change your left WC Tang Shou into a punch to your opponent's face.

The whole process is 100% "pure" WC technique. In this whole process, your left WC Tang Shou and right WC Bong Shou may only touch on your opponent right arm and left arm for 1/4 second.

Why can't you make this one of your daily drills? It's very similar to the boxing "jab, cross". The only difference is you add

- left WC Tang Shou along with your right "jab", and
- right WC Bong Shou along with your left "cross".


----------



## SaulGoodman

I find it hilarious that these guys think that KPM is my alter-ego!! Perhaps their egos are so big they can't stand the idea of there being more than 1 person on the same forum who considers a lot of what they say is horse sh&it. As far as I know, KPM is based in the US, I am based in the UK. The moderators/administrators of this site can quickly check our individual account details (and possibly IP address info) to allay the fears of LFJ and GUYB that sure me and KPM are kindred spirits, but we certainly ain't the  same people. I haven't read their comments regarding The KFM magazine forum
(as I have these clowns on ignore), I have been a lurker there for some time but have never had an account there. I did enjoy Frosts posts when he used to post there, I'm presuming that the VT tm police think we are one and the same, boneheads.


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> I find it hilarious that these guys think that KPM is my alter-ego!!



Now hold on just one minute bub!  I thought YOU were MY alter ego!!!


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Doesn't sound very efficient to me!



Training is more than drilling


----------



## guy b.

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The whole process is 100% "pure" WC technique. In this whole process, your left WC Tang Shou and right WC Bong Shou may only touch on your opponent right arm and left arm for 1/4 second.



The drills teach specific things in VT. Changing those drills would mean loss of that training. Training for fighting is done by sparring


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

guy b. said:


> The drills teach specific things in VT. Changing those drills would mean loss of that training. Training for fighting is done by sparring


What good are those "special things" if you can't use it in fighting?


----------



## guy b.

wckf92 said:


> What does it look like then? (VT I mean)



One basic difference would be elbows down


----------



## guy b.

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What good are those "special things" if you can't use it in fighting?



Drills train positions, power chain, habits which are used in fighting. Specific and direct applications are not trained in drills.


----------



## Phobius

guy b. said:


> Drills train positions, power chain, habits which are used in fighting. Specific and direct applications are not trained in drills.



I am pretty sure even WSL VT trains applications in drills as well. Everyone has to do it, if not things would be too illusive to grasp for the new guys.

While a concept based system wants to ascend the applications specifically it still has to be drilled. Without drilling how do you know how to fight in the first place? And without knowing how to fight, how do you know you are reacting in a proper way?

Its like sparring a guy that has never fought once in his life, what is he gonna teach you? The things that work on him best, might not be best overall.


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> Plus, Jai calls himself a "_Wing Chun/Freestyle MA guy_" in the description.
> 
> KPM should be able to recognize that he was not using VT at all in those clips. He was doing whatever his "Freestyle MA" is. Pretty sure most beginners would be able to tell that much.
> .



Ok then.  Here are some videos that state clearly "Wing Chun vs. X" and say nothing about "MMA." 
















Please explain to us all how the sparring we see above relates to the training in Chi Sau/Lop Sau we see in this video:






In the Chi Sau thread Guy wrote:
*It trains your punch in terms of elbow behavior, unthinking habits and correct reactions. It trains the body and power chain; correct structure and generation of force. 

Chi sau is error correction. like the dummy. Sparing and fighting is testing - this is where errors become visible. 
There is a large element of movement, structure, and force generation training in poon sau and chi sau. Errors in these elements exposed during testing is part of what chi sau corrects. The arm bridges utilised in chi sau are not literal techniques to be used in fighting. They are training wheels to allow you to get your balance before trying again to ride the bike without.*

That's a good answer.  But can you point out how all that is related to what we are seeing in the sparring videos?

And if these sparring videos are not representative of WSLVT, please post some that are.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> if these sparring videos are not representative of WSLVT, please post some



Those clips look like messing around with a boxing guard and movement. I don't know Jai Harman and you would need to ask him if these constitute good representations of his wing chun. For you I think he might say yes.


----------



## geezer

wckf92 said:


> What does it look like then? (VT I mean)



I'd like to see _LFJ_ or _Guy B _put up some videos of their VT being used in a "fight" (I assume that would actually be sparring with heavy contact?) against competant representatives of a boxing/mma approach. So far about the only videos that purport to show WC/VT/WT being used _successfully_ in this kind of situation come from Alan Orr's guys ....and then everybody gripes that it doesn't look like WC/VT/WT.  

Fair enough. So LFJ and Guy, can you *post something better*, please? Heck Guy has told us that he goes at it _bare knuckle_ every week or two. That totally tops anything I do. Even if the video doesn't look great, he'd have my total respect if he posted that. Honestly!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

guy b. said:


> Drills train positions, power chain, habits which are used in fighting. Specific and direct applications are not trained in drills.


Let's compare WC with Taiji.

- WC has forms, Chi Shou, and fight.
- Taiji has form, push hand, and ?

From WC Chi Shou to fight, or from Taiji push hand to fight, something is missing. IMO, the missing part is the "fighting skill drills". This is why WC fight or Taiji fight doesn't look like training. If you don't drill your "left Tang Shou, right face punch" 10,000 times, there is no way that you can just suddenly use it in fighting.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Those clips look like messing around with a boxing guard and movement. I don't know Jai Harman and you would need to ask him if these constitute good representations of his wing chun. For you I think he might say yes.



Again, please post some videos that you think are representative of WSLVT sparring so we can compare.


----------



## SaulGoodman

geezer said:


> I'd like to see _LFJ_ or _Guy B _put up some videos of their VT being used in a "fight" (I assume that would actually be sparring with heavy contact?) against competant representatives of a boxing/mma approach. So far about the only videos that purport to show WC/VT/WT being used _successfully_ in this kind of situation come from Alan Orr's guys ....and then everybody gripes that it doesn't look like WC/VT/WT.
> 
> Fair enough. So LFJ and Guy, can you *post something better*, please? Heck Guy has told us that he goes at it _bare knuckle_ every week or two. That totally tops anything I do. Even if the video doesn't look great, he'd have my total respect if he posted that. Honestly!


Hope you're ready for a LOOOONG wait Geezer. These guys have been called out many times to show their superior approach on video and always refuse stating that they don't have to post videos to justify their (normally) derogatory views on OTHER people's videos. 
After all, it's a forum right? They're allowed their opinions... The VT tm fanboys advice to people who get upset when their videos get ripped apart would be "don't post videos if you don't want criticism". Which is EXACTLY why they never have or will post any clips of them using their VT tm in an alive fashion. I guarantee if either posted a sparring clip, the majority here would be like "are they kidding?"....


----------



## guy b.

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's compare WC with Taiji.
> 
> - WC has forms, Chi Shou, and fight.
> - Taiji has form, push hand, and ?
> 
> From WC Chi Shou to fight, or from Taiji push hand to fight, something is missing. IMO, the missing part is the "fighting skill drills". This is why WC fight or Taiji fight doesn't look like training. If you don't drill your "left Tang Shou, right face punch" 10,000 times, there is no way that you can just suddenly use it in fighting.



Thanks, I will consider your advice


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Again, please post some videos that you think are representative of WSLVT sparring so we can compare.



I'm sorry, I don't have any available.


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> I'd like to see _LFJ_ or _Guy B _put up some videos of their VT being used in a "fight"



I think any request would need to appear honest before it was considered seriously. Maybe some unbiased requests to moderators would help? Maybe less trolling. Who knows?


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> I'm sorry, I don't have any available.



Now wait a minute.  Previously you guys boasted that 1000's....yes 1000's!....of people had switched from "regular" Wing Chun to WSLVT and were sold on it.  Now you are saying that NONE of those 1000's of people have posted any sparring videos showing how much they have learned?  Really???


----------



## SaulGoodman

Yeah, really


----------



## wckf92

KPM said:


> 1000's....yes 1000's!....of people had switched from "*regular*" Wing Chun to WSLVT and were sold on it.



Isn't "regular" meant as "wrong" or "incorrect" or "incoherent"? Hahaha


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Now wait a minute.  Previously you guys boasted that 1000's....yes 1000's!....of people had switched from "regular" Wing Chun to WSLVT and were sold on it.  Now you are saying that NONE of those 1000's of people have posted any sparring videos showing how much they have learned?  Really???



Lots of people have sparring videos and of course these are shared freely


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Lots of people have sparring videos and of course these are shared freely



But you don't know of any that are good examples of WSLVT????  How about you do us a favor and search on youtube for all of these videos from "lots of people" (assuming you mean WSLVT people, because that was who were talking about) and select a few that you think are a good example of WSLVT sparring.  That shouldn't be too hard, should it?


----------



## SaulGoodman

KPM said:


> But you don't know of any that are good examples of WSLVT????  How about you do us a favor and search on youtube for all of these videos from "lots of people" (assuming you mean WSLVT people, because that was who were talking about) and select a few that you think are a good example of WSLVT sparring.  That shouldn't be too hard, should it?


These guys are too funny. When pressed for sparring clips they point to clips of other VT tm guys and when you ask them why they can't show clips of themselves they say "we do the same stuff so we don't need to"... Don't push too hard KPM otherwise GUYB will unleash the hilarious "sparring" clip of the WSLVT tm guy sparring the Hsing I master. Iirc he posted it a while back on KFM and felt it was the best thing since sliced bread. It, umm, wasnt...


----------



## drop bear

KPM said:


> You don't fight the way your train, nor train the way you fight?  Doesn't sound very efficient to me!



Ever used a speed ball?


----------



## SaulGoodman

Not the ol speed ball/skipping rope analogy, again...


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> Ever used a speed ball?


I bet I could chain punch the **** out of that speed bag.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> I think any request would need to appear honest before it was considered seriously. Maybe some unbiased requests to moderators would help? Maybe less trolling. Who knows?



Does that mean, "No, there aren't any good PB-WSL-VT sparring clips out there to recommend"?    ....Darn.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> Ever used a speed ball?


When you hit a speed ball, you may only think about punching on your opponent's face. You may ignore that he still has 2 arms that can be near his head and you have to deal with at the same time. If you want to train as WC and fight as WC, the speed ball is not the best training tool.

IMO, the difference between boxing and WC (or CMA in general) is in

- boxing, you punch your opponent's face when his face is open. You "*wait*" for your opponent to open up.
- WC (or CMA in general), you use your Tang Shou (or Fu Shou, Pai Shou, Lap Shou, ...)  to move his arm away from his head, you then punch his face. You "*make*" your opponent to open up.


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> If such heavy criticism is going to be applied to Alan Orr's work, I thought "turn about" was only "fair play"!!



So your argument is "_Alan isn't the only one_ with a disconnect between training, theory, and fighting"...

I have to say that's not a very flattering line of argument for Alan, and not one I would take.

You can go ahead and assume you have proven my VT to be horrible. Everyone in my lineage totally sucks. No video necessary.

That brings us _not one step closer_ to proving Alan's claims of unbalancing "bridge" skills being directly applicable in a fight.

You could say we're "blind to it", and Alan already has, but no one can even point to a single timestamp on any of their many fight videos and say "here it is".

A completely inexperienced person would be able to watch the opponent and see them being unbalanced by "bridge" contact. But it can't be pointed to.

I think Alan knows this, but is at this point too invested in the method, what with all the DVDs, online mentorship, and new book he's trying to sell.

That's why when pressed on the question, rather than pointing to a timestamp, he loses his temper, issues challenge fights, and demands MMA records or videos.

That is nothing but an attempt to discredit the questioner to divert the question.

So again, assuming or even proving my VT is horrible doesn't demonstrate Alan's Force Flow unbalancing "bridge" skills actually work in fighting.

Deflect all you want. So far, it has not been, and apparently can't be, demonstrated.

And in fact, all their fight videos are evidence that it is not applicable.


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> Please explain to us all how the sparring we see above relates to the training in Chi Sau/Lop Sau we see in this video:



Jai isn't a student of PB lineage.

I have no idea if he and I even share the same understanding of the system. He's 3 generations removed from WSL in a branch I have zero experience with.

There's a lot of variation within WSLVT. I can't criticize Geezer's YMVT by pointing to a video of a Kwok student, can I? Same here.

You will have to ask Jai what his understanding of the system is. I really know nothing of what his theory and training is like. After several generations it could be quite different.

What I can say is we often see in his clips side body stances, haymakers, round kicks, and wrestling. Those are not things I integrate into my VT.


----------



## KPM

So your argument is "_Alan isn't the only one_ with a disconnect between training, theory, and fighting"...

_---I never said Alan has a "disconnect."   You did!_ 


You can go ahead and assume you have proven my VT to be horrible. Everyone in my lineage totally sucks. No video necessary.

_---I never said that either.  I think WSLVT is a good system.  Maybe a little one dimensional, but a good system.  The DIFFERENCE is....I don't think that EVERY other system of Wing Chun sucks....as you and Guy seem to think, regardless of any minor comments you think say otherwise.  I was only pointing out that your criticism of Alan Orr can apply equally to WSLVT._



That's why when pressed on the question, rather than pointing to a timestamp, he loses his temper, issues challenge fights, and demands MMA records or videos.

_---But it seems that, on the other hand, when pressed to point to ANY video of WSLVT sparring that you think is acceptable....you and Guy can produce nothing._ 


Deflect all you want. So far, it has not been, and apparently can't be, demonstrated.

_----And by that logic, WSLVT doesn't really EVER free-spar or fight, because it can't be demonstrated!_


----------



## KPM

Jai isn't a student of PB lineage.

_----But he is WSL lineage.   Or did their lineage not get the "real" thing from WSL like so many of the other poor souls out there?_


I have no idea if he and I even share the same understanding of the system. He's 3 generations removed from WSL in a branch I have zero experience with.

_---Ok.  Then please post some WSLVT free-sparring/fighting videos that you think are a good example._


----------



## KPM

KPM said:


> But you don't know of any that are good examples of WSLVT????  How about you do us a favor and search on youtube for all of these videos from "lots of people" (assuming you mean WSLVT people, because that was who were talking about) and select a few that you think are a good example of WSLVT sparring.  That shouldn't be too hard, should it?



Guy??


----------



## SaulGoodman

Hilarious, Jai Harman who lives in China, trains under a highly revered WSL master and puts up clips of himself applying his skills is not regarded as having the "real" VT tm. This is from people too egotistical to post clips of their own skills because deep down they know they are no better (probably worse) than Jais...


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---I never said Alan has a "disconnect."   You did!_


_
_
Right, but your rebuttal is to try and prove that I have a disconnect, which even if true doesn't help Alan's case.

_



			I was only pointing out that your criticism of Alan Orr can apply equally to WSLVT.
		
Click to expand...

_
It can't though. The criticism is that Alan claims direct applicability of _chi-sau_ techniques which however don't appear in their fights. I do not make this claim.



> _---But it seems that, on the other hand, when pressed to point to ANY video of WSLVT sparring that you think is acceptable....you and Guy can produce nothing._




Which is not an issue to me. The efficacy of what I train doesn't rely on there being video online to satisfy the trolls.

In my lineage, it is requested that we don't show free fighting aspects or too much else publicly beyond some specific drills. If people are interested in what is shown, they are welcome to come and see more.

Alan chooses to make a lot public, so it's fair to ask about it.
_



			----And by that logic, WSLVT doesn't really EVER free-spar or fight, because it can't be demonstrated!
		
Click to expand...

_
It can be demonstrated in person. Alan has public fight videos. That's his choice. But we never see what he claims to be directly applicable from _chi-sau_. It's just a question about things he has chosen to make public. 

Seems easy enough to point to a timestamp rather than get angry and demand MMA records and videos from others or issue challenges. Discrediting the questioner suggests the question is too difficult or embarrassing to answer truthfully. 



KPM said:


> Jai isn't a student of PB lineage.
> 
> _----But he is WSL lineage.   Or did their lineage not get the "real" thing from WSL like so many of the other poor souls out there?_


_
_
As I said, I wouldn't know. I'm not familiar with his branch and it is several generations removed from where I stand. What's with the bating?

_



			---Ok.  Then please post some WSLVT free-sparring/fighting videos that you think are a good example.
		
Click to expand...

_
Isn't that off topic? Whether I can or cannot show good VT fighting clips won't answer the question of Alan's unbalancing "bridge" techniques never showing up in their fight clips.

Assume what I show is horrible VT. Does that mean Alan's techniques have now shown up? Timestamp?


----------



## LFJ

SaulGoodman said:


> Hilarious, Jai Harman who lives in China, trains under a highly revered WSL master and puts up clips of himself applying his skills is not regarded as having the "real" VT tm. This is from people too egotistical to post clips of their own skills because deep down they know they are no better (probably worse) than Jais...



Typical KPM trolling style of putting words in others' mouths to sow discord. Please stop.


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> Typical KPM trolling style of putting words in others' mouths to sow discord. Please stop.



How is it trolling to simply ask for you and Guy to supply what you think is a good example of WSLVT free-sparring?   How is it trolling to simply ask you and Guy to show how the Chi Sau/Lop Sau training seen in numerous PB videos shows up in a clip of WSLVT free-sparring? 

This is a discussion forum.  Threads in any discussion forum tend to drift in different directions as they grow.  This thread started off talking about Alan Orr's new video, then drifted into a question of why what is in that video is hard to see in his other sparring videos.   Now, since we are on the topic of videos and sparring, I'd simply like to drift in the direction of talking about how the things in PB's videos show up in sparring.  That is relatively on topic for the theme of the thread, and not trolling at all.   The only people that would see it as trolling, are the people that might find it hard to answer the questions the topic might produce!


----------



## SaulGoodman

So where's these PBWSLVT clips showing us where we are all going wrong then?


----------



## wckf92

SaulGoodman said:


> So where's these PBWSLVT clips showing us where we are all going wrong then?


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> How is it trolling to simply ask for you and Guy to supply what you think is a good example of WSLVT free-sparring?



I said the bit about putting words in others' mouths is your typical trolling tactic to sow discord, as you just did under your SaulGoodman account again.



> How is it trolling to simply ask you and Guy to show how the Chi Sau/Lop Sau training seen in numerous PB videos shows up in a clip of WSLVT free-sparring?



You were answered 7 pages earlier, and brought it up again just to troll.



> Now, since we are on the topic of videos and sparring, I'd simply like to drift in the direction of talking about how the things in PB's videos show up in sparring.



No one has claimed _chi-sau_ or _laap-sau_ drills from that lineage are directly applicable in fighting. You were told they are not numerous times and their abstract nature was explained to you. Either you have severe attention deficit disorder, as you accuse us of having, or you are trolling to divert the question about Alan's claims.


----------



## KPM

I said the bit about putting words in others' mouths is your typical trolling tactic to sow discord, as you just did under your SaulGoodman account again.

_---So, you have bought into Guy's paranoid delusion?  You guys hang out together too much!  _



You were answered 7 pages earlier, and brought it up again just to troll.k

_---It wasn't really answered at all.  I didn't bring it up to "troll".  I brought it up because I see it as a legitimate question and topic for conversation.  I think others here a curious about the answer as well. So are you going to answer the question, or just continue to deflect and obfuscate?_



No one has claimed _chi-sau_ or _laap-sau_ drills from that lineage are directly applicable in fighting. You were told they are not numerous times and their abstract nature was explained to you.

_---I didn't ask you to demonstrate how the drills show up directly in fighting.  What I said was   *can you point out how all that is related to what we are seeing in the sparring videos? * It is related isn't?  Otherwise why are you training it?

---I've also asked you simply to show us a video of what you consider good WSLVT lineage free-sparring/fighting.  Why is that so difficult?  Are you saying there are none?_


----------



## Phobius

Shh, its a secret. (Sounds like a non-contributing post, but it has actually been stated by LFJ and guy (I think) that showing sparring using the real WSLVT is forbidden)


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---It wasn't really answered at all._



It has been answered several times on this thread, and on almost every thread we get into with you.



> _---I didn't ask you to demonstrate how the drills show up directly in fighting.  What I said was   *can you point out how all that is related to what we are seeing in the sparring videos? * It is related isn't?  Otherwise why are you training it?_



You posted videos of separate branches, one of which I have zero experience with and have no idea what their training is like. You'd better ask him what he's doing.
_



			---I've also asked you simply to show us a video of what you consider good WSLVT lineage free-sparring/fighting.  Why is that so difficult?  Are you saying there are none?
		
Click to expand...

_
I posted a clip that showed a bit of light sparring in the thread on WSL _taan-sau_, where we ironically spent pages and pages answering the same question you're bringing up here... again... You ignored it to troll some more.

Seems on any thread where things are not going the way you like, you start trolling until you get one of us to say something that "offends" you so you can report it and get the thread closed.


----------



## SaulGoodman

LFJ, stop being paranoid. I have said several times that KPM and I ARE NOT THE SAME PERSON. More than one person on this forum don't like your rhetoric. Deal with it.


----------



## LFJ

Well, you share the same trolling tactics. Bit peculiar.

It's now "rhetoric" to ask where the force flow unbalancing "bridge" skills are in public fight videos when it's claimed to be directly applicable?

Excuse me for asking such an unreasonable question. How dare I?


----------



## KPM

Well, you share the same trolling tactics. Bit peculiar.

_---What "trolling tactics"?  Like I pointed out to Guy on the other thread.....when the both of you were tag-teaming on me it was perfectly fine.  But now Saul comes along and is willing to back me up and just happens to share some of my same opinions and you and Guy don't like it one bit!  Funny how that works!     And I've never accused you and Guy of being the same person....even though it becomes difficult in most threads to tell you two apart!_


Excuse me for asking such an unreasonable question. How dare I?

_---And excuse me for asking such an unreasonable question as ....."can you show us all some clips of what you consider good WSLVT free-sparring?"!  How dare I indeed!!!   You get all defensive over such a simple question??_


Seems on any thread where things are not going the way you like, you start trolling until you get one of us to say something that "offends" you so you can report it and get the thread closed.

_---First, how was this thread not "going the way" I like?  You guys didn't prove anything or win any kind of argument.  It was just a discussion.  I thought it was rather disrespectful to Alan and his guys, but that's the extent of it.   Second, I have never reported a thread to the moderators in my life!  Your paranoia is notable!  _

_---But, at this point it is becoming very clear that you have no intentions of answering either of my questions here.  This leaves me to conclude that you won't post any good WSLVT sparring videos because there aren't any to post.  Despite the 1000's of people that you say have converted to WSLVT and been won over....I guess none of them were won over enough to actually post videos showing how much their free-sparring skills have improved with WSLVT.  That seems rather curious to me.  But we should leave it at that and not continue to draw this out._ _ But wait....Guy hasn't had the chance to wade in and tell me how unreasonable I am being for asking these simple questions.  So this probably won't end anytime soon!  _


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---What "trolling tactics"? _



Pay attention now. I said it's the bit about putting words in others' mouths to sow discord. I never said Jai or WZP don't have real VT. I made it clear I am not familiar with their actual training and theory.



> _I thought it was rather disrespectful to Alan and his guys, but that's the extent of it._



It's disrespectful to say I don't see what he's talking about show up in fights and to ask where it is? Odd.



> _---But, at this point it is becoming very clear that you have no intentions of answering either of my questions here.  This leaves me to conclude that you won't post any good WSLVT sparring videos because there aren't any to post._



Now you're just back to lying again. We answer your same question on every thread, and I did give you a clip on the _taan-sau_ thread. You ignored it then and you're ignoring it again now.


----------



## KPM

Now you're just back to lying again. We answer your same question on every thread, and I did give you a clip on the _taan-sau_ thread. You ignored it then and you're ignoring it again now.

_---There you go accusing me of being a liar again!    I'm not lying about anything.  But it has been awhile since that thread.  If I ignored a good clip, then I apologize for that.  Please post it again here so we can all review it properly._


----------



## LFJ

I've been posting from a phone. Inconvenient. It's in that thread. Just go look for it.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> But you don't know of any that are good examples of WSLVT????



I have quite a few video clips of excellent VT sparring.


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> Does that mean, "No, there aren't any good PB-WSL-VT sparring clips out there to recommend"? ....Darn.



There are good sparring clips. I think they are unlikely to be posted on this forum. KPM always attacks the man when he's lost an argument. Same again here. It is disappointing to see other forum members acting in the same way. 

If I post a clip online claiming something then I will expect to answer questions on that claim. Until that time I won't.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> There would need to be *a reason* *to share*



I can think of several:

First off, _sharing info _is a big part of what we all do here. You, yourself frequently ask for explanations about other people's approaches to WC/VT/WT. And you have at various times expressed disappointment, irritation or disdain when others (KPM, Joy, etc.) have refused to do so.

Secondly, you've criticized Jai for not showing WSL-VT when sparring:


guy b. said:


> I have no connection with JH and have no idea about his ability in VT, but VT in a fight does not look like that.



So naturally, that leads to the question, W_hat should WSL-VT look like in a "fight" or sparring bout? _

Finally, there is a general paucity of good sparring or fighting clips of WC/VT/WT (_any_ lineage) showing classical WC techniques being used successfully against solid opposition by a versatile MMA fighter. The WC guys who are successful seem to be either 1. much more experienced or able than their opponents or 2. Like Alan's fighters, they use a wide ranging MMA approach that _outwardly_ doesn't look much like classical WC.

So if either you or LFJ can show some good clips of your VT looking good in a sparring situation, I'm sure most everybody here would appreciate it.

On the other hand, playing coy and demanding a reason to share, and broadly questioning the honesty and motives of everyone else here really doesn't show you at your best, if you really stop to think about it.


----------



## SaulGoodman

KPM said:


> Now you're just back to lying again. We answer your same question on every thread, and I did give you a clip on the _taan-sau_ thread. You ignored it then and you're ignoring it again now.
> 
> _---There you go accusing me of being a liar again!    I'm not lying about anything.  But it has been awhile since that thread.  If I ignored a good clip, then I apologize for that.  Please post it again here so we can all review it properly._


Never mind tan sau clips, let's see some VT tm sparring/fighting clips. Let's see some blood sweat and tears goddam it!


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> First off, _sharing info _is a big part of what we all do here.



You are joking? 



geezer said:


> You, yourself frequently ask for explanations about other people's approaches to WC/VT/WT. And you have at various times expressed disappointment, irritation or disdain when others (KPM, Joy, etc.) have refused to do so.



I am very happy to answer questions and provide explanations. 



geezer said:


> So naturally, that leads to the question, W_hat should WSL-VT look like in a "fight" or sparring bout?_



Ask away.



geezer said:


> broadly questioning the honesty and motives of everyone else here really doesn't show you at your best



What do you suggest when honesty and motives appear suspect?


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> You are j_oking?_



Never quite sure about that myself. 




guy b. said:


> I am very happy to answer questions and provide explanations.


Wonderful! We've all heard that a picture is worth a thousand words. So a videoclip that shows exactly what you mean would worth even more. So rather than a wall of text go right ahead and post something that can clear this up. 




guy b. said:


> What do you suggest when honesty and motives appear suspect?


 
Hey, I've made a strong effort to refrain from questioning your motives and honesty regardless of what others say. Seriously now.


----------



## KPM

I have quite a few video clips of excellent VT sparring.

_---Great!  Let's see them!  _

KPM always attacks the man when he's lost an argument.

_---That's funny.  I don't recall losing any arguments lately.  Is your paranoid delusion expanding? Have I attacked anyone?_   Are you going to see me leaping at you from dark alleys when you go shopping?  _Let me put your mind at rest...I live in the US and have no intentions of visiting the UK in the near future_.


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> So rather than a wall of text go right ahead and post something that can clear this up



I will try to be concise. Ask away


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> _Is your paranoid delusion expanding? Have I attacked anyone?_ Are you going to see me leaping at you from dark alleys when you go shopping? _Let me put your mind at rest...I live in the US and have no intentions of visiting the UK in the near future_.



Continuing to attack the person not the argument


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> I've made a strong effort to refrain



Why bother? I don't mind if you tell me what you think about my motives.


----------



## guy b.

So does this amount to a "no response" to the question about Alan's unbalacing skills showing up in chi sau but not in fighting? If the question can't be answered then that's ok, but it would save time just to say it. 

As LFJ says, feel free to think whatever you like about the quality of my VT. It doesn't change the question on the table, which hasn't been answered by Alan or anyone else.


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> I will try to be concise. Ask away



I just _did_. Are you really that obtuse, or just being cute. ...or acute and obtuse at the same time. Now that is an oxymoron!

Say, while I've got your attention, might I suggest that we resolve this whole disingenuous issue about KPM and Saul being one person (on two continents, yet) and you and LFJ (similarly one and yet divided) by having you refer to each other as _teams! _ ...at least for the times when you seem to be taking identical positions. That way rather than derail a thread over _trumped-up_ (an especially apt term for these times, at least in the USA) identity issues, you can simply reply to both of the opposing parties using their team name.

So you could start by picking team names and a mascot, like for example, the GB-LFJ J_ackals_ (straining to find some alliteration here) vs KPM-SG, aka _"Goodman and Associates"_, or Myers and his _Malicious Magpies_. Looking forward to your decision. Oh and still waiting for that videoclip. Please hurry. I'm already going on 61 and don't know how much time I have left.


----------



## KPM

geezer said:


> So you could start by picking team names and a mascot, like for example, the GB-LFJ J_ackals_ (straining to find some alliteration here) vs KPM-SG, aka _"Goodman and Associates"_, or Myers and his _Malicious Magpies_. Looking forward to your decision. Oh and still waiting for that videoclip. Please hurry. I'm already going on 61 and don't know how much time I have left.



Oh!  I pick "Terminators".....Saul, what do you think?


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> So does this amount to a "no response" to the question about Alan's unbalacing skills showing up in chi sau but not in fighting? If the question can't be answered then that's ok, but it would save time just to say it.
> .



I attempted to answer your question to be the best of my abilities, given that I've never studied "forceflow."  I even provided several video clips, none of which met your satisfaction.   Now its your turn.


----------



## SaulGoodman

KPM said:


> Oh!  I pick "Terminators".....Saul, what do you think?


"The Goodman-Myers Conspiracy" gets my vote!


----------



## SaulGoodman

I reiterate again. The reason GUYB et al hide behind argument after argument in order to not provide sparring clips is simply because they don't want to receive the "constructive" criticism they are so quick to dish out.

So, in the absence of any death match VT tm clips supplied by the fanboys, I give you a clip that GUYB posted on KFM some time ago that he entitled " excellent ving tsun under pressure". I believe he expected people to be awe inspired by the content. They weren't and he threw his toys out of the pram during the thread. 

Anyways, here's his introduction to the clip :

"Excellent maintenance of structure, frame, distance and movement in this clip, under unknown pressure in a potentially embarrassing situation. This is about the only clip I can find on the internet of ving tsun working in a way that doesn't look stiff, predetermined, or easily beaten by a freely moving fighter. Good clip, great ving tsun. Anyone seen better?"


----------



## SaulGoodman

Not sure if KPM and Geezer are familiar with it, but the theme tune to the "Benny Hill Show" is the perfect soundtrack to that clip


----------



## Steve

SaulGoodman said:


> Not sure if KPM and Geezer are familiar with it, but the theme tune to the "Benny Hill Show" is the perfect soundtrack to that clip


Can you explain to a layman why that video is not good wing chun?


----------



## SaulGoodman

Do you think that clip is good? I see someone who is stiff, breathing heavy, running away all the time, chasing hands, trying to "do" wing chun like in drills ( thought the vt guys drills were abstract excercises). He's not controlling the center, he's not closing and controlling, he seems afraid to stay close and runs away from pressure rather than using it against the Hsing I guy, he has no close body/clinch skill, the second guy in particular, hands are way too low, do I need to continue? An entry level Thai boxer would have a field day..,,


----------



## SaulGoodman

Jais clips show much better skills imo


----------



## KPM

SaulGoodman said:


> Do you think that clip is good? I see someone who is stiff, breathing heavy, running away all the time, chasing hands, trying to "do" wing chun like in drills ( thought the vt guys drills were abstract excercises). He's not controlling the center, he's not closing and controlling, he seems afraid to stay close and runs away from pressure rather than using it against the Hsing I guy, he has no close body/clinch skill, the second guy in particular, hands are way too low, do I need to continue? An entry level Thai boxer would have a field day..,,



I like Jerry Yeung.  I think he does good stuff.  In his defense, these are clips of light sparring.  No one is wearing protective equipment and no one is really trying to take the other guy out.  I've said before, that this "back and forth" sparring type exchange is not what Wing Chun was designed for.  I think Wing Chun was designed to close and finish the opponent.  That's why Jerry ends up bouncing back and forth...he isn't actually closing in to finish the opponent.

So this is really not a very good example of Wing Chun sparring.  This is in the same category of the clips I provided of Alan Orr moving from Chi Sau to Gor Sau to light sparring and back again.  Neither Guy nor LFJ were impressed with those clips.  And abolutely spot on as far as close body skills!  If Jerry had that, then he could have closed in and controlled the opponent without punching him out and making everyone mad!  But WSLVT evidently doesn't train those kinds of things.   As I've said before, WSLVT is somewhat one-dimensional.  And you see it here.  All he can do is punch.  No attempts to affect the opponent's balance or structure at all.   Alan Orr or one of his better guys would have just bounced these Hsing I guys all over the place without actually hurting them.

And for the conspiracy theorists amongst us, I would never  say something like "_he threw his toys out of the pram during the thread_."  I'm not even sure what that means!  I take it a "pram" is the same as a baby stroller?


----------



## SaulGoodman

Hey KPM, how messed up is this, we are disageeing!!

I still don't think this is "good" wing chun. The Jerry guy DOES have fast hands but is so twitchy the way he moves!, all he seems to do is punch and recycle through the center all the time. That's very basic Wc skill taught to beginners. If that's their idea of good, they can keep it. Lol at the toys and pram!


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> I attempted to answer your question to be the best of my abilities, given that I've never studied "forceflow." I even provided several video clips, none of which met your satisfaction.



Ok, if you have never studied it then that was all you needed to say. I guess I will have to hope to catch Alan on a good day. 



> Now its your turn.



What do you want to ask me?


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> I just _did_. Are you really that obtuse, or just being cute



You asked for a video clip. I thought you wanted to ask a question, sorry


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> I still don't think this is "good" wing chun. The Jerry guy DOES have fast hands but is so twitchy the way he moves!, all he seems to do is punch and recycle through the center all the time. That's very basic Wc skill taught to beginners. If that's their idea of good, they can keep it



Ok, that's fine. We can now move on.

I don't think LFJ would agree that JY is a good representation of VT.

My purpose for posting the clip was to discuss the paucity of decent wing chun clips available. In those terms I would still say there are few if any better free movement wing chun clips freely available on youtube. In terms of all VT sparring clips then I agree, this is quite far from being the best available.


----------



## KPM

Ok, if you have never studied it then that was all you needed to say. I guess I will have to hope to catch Alan on a good day.

_---I did say that.  Multiple times!_

What do you want to ask me?

_---I've already asked two questions...several times now over the course of the last several pages of this thread.  How about answering one of those?_


----------



## geezer

guy b. said:


> My purpose for posting the clip was to discuss the paucity of decent wing chun clips available. In those terms I would still say there are few if any better free movement wing chun clips freely available on youtube.* In terms of all VT sparring clips then I agree, this is quite far from being the best available*.



OK, I'd agree that there is a scarcity of good WC sparring/fighting clips available on youtube. But then you go on to say that in terms of (WSL)VT that _this is far from being the best available_? Available where? Post one or two you like and let's see how people react. What's the harm? Jerry didn't suffer because some guys on a forum didn't much like his clip. 

BTW didn't you say that you studied a bit with Jerry at one point? Perhaps you can shed a little light on that clip that Saul resurrected.


----------



## SaulGoodman

Getting bored waiting for the VT tm sparring clips. Here's GUYB from the thread the WSL vs Hsing I death match  comes from. Oh the hypocrisy..,,

"*Maybe when you produce a clip I will take you seriously. *

Until then I imagine you are a little fat guy who trains occasionally all padded up.

I have actual experience in fighting (I think more than anyone else here in striking comps) and I know that gloves are an impediment to training for actual fighting. I came from gloves to this, not the other way around. Therfore i do not perceive soft sparring sessions in the gym with gloves to be the saviour of my ma integrity. I am already happy with that.

*Post a credible clip and we can talk.* Until then you are nothing and you stink of fear. I would smash you up standing I think. And I would break you to bits on the ground."

Internet tough guy..,


----------



## Dirty Dog

*Attention All Users:*

Please keep the conversation polite, friendly and professional. If you cannot do so, another thread will be locked, and points will be issued to individual offenders, which can lead to restriction, suspension, or ban of the accounts.

Mark A Cochran
Dirty Dog
MT Senior Moderator


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _---I've already asked two questions...several times now over the course of the last several pages of this thread.  How about answering one of those?_



And you've been answered on the same question over the course of several threads! Literally every thread we get into with you, it ends up being the same question. "Why don't we see _laap-sau_ cycles working well in free fighting?" You ignore the answer every time in order to troll some more.

You have so much time to make several more posts but don't bother to look at that video from the _taan-sau_ thread? You ignored it then just to continue pushing controversy.

In the video below there is a bit of light sparring. Just a bit, but it wasn't made for you. You will not see _chi-sau_ or _laap-sau_ drills because they aren't directly applicable "techniques", as you've been told a thousand times. What you will see is good movement and line work, VT elbow if you know what you're looking at.


----------



## LFJ

Now, regardless of your opinion on the above video, whether it's to anyone's satisfaction or not, it has no bearing on whether or not Alan's force flow bridge techniques have ever shown up in his team's fights, as he says they should and do. If anyone can point to a timestamp that'd be great.


----------



## geezer

SaulGoodman said:


> Until then I imagine you are a little fat guy who trains occasionally all padded up.



...er, actually that would be _me _you are talking about. ...Well, not exactly fat, but I could sure drop a good twenty pounds. And I am a bit on the small side at 5' 8". And when I spar we either go real light or I wear a face mask and typically use"UFC" gloves but I've also got some with more padding. I do WC pretty much as a hobby, so that suits me fine. On the other hand, if you are out there really testing your stuff, Saul, you've got my total respect.  As far as Guy goes, who knows?

Yeah, I thought I'd lay this out as a matter of "full disclosure". I'm not ashamed of being an ordinary guy. But there's plenty of shame in being a phony, hypocritical poseur. Not that that would apply to anybody on _this_ forum.


----------



## Tames D

This thread must be VT's version of ground hog day. (if you know what I mean)


----------



## SaulGoodman

Ooooops, my primary school level of quotation usage has caused a major misinterpretation of my post. After my statement "oh the hypocrisy", it's all GUYB text from the KFM thread related to the "sparring" clip. I only chip in again at the end with "internet tough guy". Unlike this guy I would never issue challenges via a keyboard, I gave up playing in the sandbox a LONG time ago. Tbh I thought it would be informative to the participants (and lurkers) of this thread to see just how hypocritical some people can be.


----------



## KPM

And you've been answered on the same question over the course of several threads! Literally every thread we get into with you, it ends up being the same question. "Why don't we see _laap-sau_ cycles working well in free fighting?" You ignore the answer every time in order to troll some more.

_----Not really.  The answer has never been very good.   And most recently I asked how it RELATES to sparring.  It does relate, does it not?  Otherwise, why train it?   And I have answer the same question multiple times over several threads myself._ 


You have so much time to make several more posts but don't bother to look at that video from the _taan-sau_ thread? You ignored it then just to continue pushing controversy.

_----It would have been major effort for me to go back and find that thread and then read through multiple pages to find the post you are talking about.  It would have been much easier for you to just search for it on youtube again (since you know what you are looking for) and repost it.  But you didn't.  You'd rather argue on and on._ 


In the video below there is a bit of light sparring. Just a bit, but it wasn't made for you. You will not see _chi-sau_ or _laap-sau_ drills because they aren't directly applicable "techniques", as you've been told a thousand times. What you will see is good movement and line work, VT elbow if you know what you're looking at.

_---Pretty good compilation clip.  Light sparring...yes.  PB's partner wasn't really giving him much resistance in the short sections we can see.  But I will say, that PB himself light-sparring looks very similar to PB doing his Chi Sau/Lop Sau training.   Now how hard was that LFJ?   Wouldn't it have been easier to do that right from the "restart" of this thread rather than argue and obfuscate for 3 pages?_ 

_---But thanks for the clip.  Probably the most we can expect to see.  I'm out!_


----------



## guy b.

SaulGoodman said:


> Getting bored waiting for the VT tm sparring clips. Here's GUYB from the thread the WSL vs Hsing I death match  comes from. Oh the hypocrisy..,,
> 
> "*Maybe when you produce a clip I will take you seriously. *
> 
> Until then I imagine you are a little fat guy who trains occasionally all padded up.
> 
> I have actual experience in fighting (I think more than anyone else here in striking comps) and I know that gloves are an impediment to training for actual fighting. I came from gloves to this, not the other way around. Therfore i do not perceive soft sparring sessions in the gym with gloves to be the saviour of my ma integrity. I am already happy with that.
> 
> *Post a credible clip and we can talk.* Until then you are nothing and you stink of fear. I would smash you up standing I think. And I would break you to bits on the ground."
> 
> Internet tough guy..,



Are you Frost? This would explain your animosity. 

Lol at taking the above post seriously


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> Now, regardless of your opinion on the above video, whether it's to anyone's satisfaction or not, it has no bearing on whether or not Alan's force flow bridge techniques have ever shown up in his team's fights, as he says they should and do. If anyone can point to a timestamp that'd be great.



I think KPM has said that he doesn't know anything about force flow. With Alan not posting I think that leaves nobody who does know, unless maybe the guy who trains with Alan in NZ could answer? Or Alan re-appears.


----------



## guy b.

KPM said:


> Not really. The answer has never been very good. And most recently I asked how it RELATES to sparring. It does relate, does it not? Otherwise, why train it? And I have answer the same question multiple times over several threads myself.



This has been answered. What didn't you like about the reply?



KPM said:


> I will say, that PB himself light-sparring looks very similar to PB doing his Chi Sau/Lop Sau training.



Really, you think?


----------



## guy b.

geezer said:


> Available where?



Available to people who are serious, interested and who are not trolling.


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> You have so much time to make several more posts but don't bother to look at that video from the _taan-sau_ thread? You ignored it then just to continue pushing controversy.



Obviously KPM didn't look at this clip the first time it was posted either. You are correct, the intention appears to be just to troll.


----------



## KPM

guy b. said:


> Obviously KPM didn't look at this clip the first time it was posted either. You are correct, the intention appears to be just to troll.



Who's trolling???


----------



## SaulGoodman

So no clips of VT tm sparring? I think I will stick to studying Alan Orrs functional "non wing chun" clips...


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> _----It would have been major effort for me to go back and find that thread and then read through multiple pages to find the post you are talking about.  It would have been much easier for you to just search for it on youtube again (since you know what you are looking for) and repost it.  But you didn't.  You'd rather argue on and on._



I argued after I told you about the clip? I said it was inconvenient for me to repost it from a phone, then didn't post again until I came back with it. Plus I need a working VPN to open Youtube and grab the link.

Once I got back to a computer it took me about 5 seconds to open that thread and scroll through till I found the video. No reading, no major effort. But Anyway...

_



			PB's partner wasn't really giving him much resistance in the short sections we can see.
		
Click to expand...

_
That's exactly how it's supposed to appear. One objective is to use tactical footwork and angling strikes to cut the opponent off and close recovery options. So try as they might, once they have lost position it's very difficult to recover. That's what VT does.

Anyone who gets caught in the grinder with PB will look like they aren't giving much resistance, though they may actually be pushed to their limits. He shows students the free fighting side of things so that they know how it's supposed to work and have some motivation to keep improving.
_



			But I will say, that PB himself light-sparring looks very similar to PB doing his Chi Sau/Lop Sau training.   Now how hard was that LFJ?   Wouldn't it have been easier to do that right from the "restart" of this thread rather than argue and obfuscate for 3 pages?
		
Click to expand...

_
Not sure exactly how you mean, but fine.

Not sure what you think I was obfuscating either, but I was only arguing a point about Alan's "bridge" techniques. I'm actually really interested in seeing it work in action as he says it should. I have my doubts, but it would be interesting for sure.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Apparently, my warning yesterday wasn't clear enough.

*Thread locked pending staff review.*


----------

