ANY Fighting Style can work if you train it right.

[DaveB]

...And one more for luck: Different training, same art.

 

[jobo]

...And one more for luck: Different training, same art.

one,) de appears to only show his moves on much smaller females and two) he is justify wing Chun by how much its like boxing if you throw out or the pointless / useless stuff, which begs the question of why they teach it at all if its a) pointless and b) useless

 

[DaveB]

one,) de appears to only show his moves on much smaller females and two) he is justify wing Chun by how much its like boxing if you throw out or the pointless / useless stuff, which begs the question of why they teach it at all if its a) pointless and b) useless

1. He's demoing on a partner not trying to prove anything. I'm led to believe that Orr has lots of footage of him and his students sparring.

2. You and I must have watched completely different videos.

 

[jobo]

1. He's demoing on a partner not trying to prove anything. I'm led to believe that Orr has lots of footage of him and his students sparring.

2. You and I must have watched completely different videos.

I'm not really apposed to your view, that all ma,work if you train them right. Just training then right involves dropping a lot of moves and positioning so they are more like boxing or MT.

And that's largely what he is recommending you do with wing chun . Forget the planted stance and silly guard and move like a boxer, but then why not just do boxing in the first place instead of learning movement or in wing China case lack of movement patterns that you then have to unlearn.

I've formed a view that my own art is a lot of filler, that 8 moves more or less covers all eventualities, but at least the movement patterns are good

 

[DaveB]

I'm not really apposed to your view, that all ma,work if you train them right. Just training then right involves dropping a lot of moves and positioning so they are more like boxing or MT.

And that's largely what he is recommending you do with wing chun . Forget the planted stance and silly guard and move like a boxer, but then why not just do boxing in the first place instead of learning movement or in wing China case lack of movement patterns that you then have to unlearn.

I've formed a view that my own art is a lot of filler, that 8 moves more or less covers all eventualities, but at least the movement patterns are good

I don't think Alan Orr is saying anything like that and niether am I.

My own view is simply that if what your doing can hit and cause damage (e.g. your art has punches or kicks) then there are core skills you can develop to enable you to land those hits and that these core skills are universal.

They are things like distancing, positioning, timing and footwork. Almost any technique can be landed if you know how and when to throw it. It's no different to when a pundit analyses how the knockout blow was set up: you create the conditions you need.

That is not a change in fighting style or becoming more like boxing. It is understanding the tools in your art better, and being able to do it in a fight is just about creating alive (ie semi free, natural movement with open responses) drills that let you train with a degree of realism before you get into full sparring.

Alan's videos don't say, "just imitate boxing", they say, "this is how you translate these skills from wing chun training to wing chun fighting".

 

[jobo]

I don't think Alan Orr is saying anything like that and niether am I.

My own view is simply that if what your doing can hit and cause damage (e.g. your art has punches or kicks) then there are core skills you can develop to enable you to land those hits and that these core skills are universal.

They are things like distancing, positioning, timing and footwork. Almost any technique can be landed if you know how and when to throw it. It's no different to when a pundit analyses how the knockout blow was set up: you create the conditions you need.

That is not a change in fighting style or becoming more like boxing. It is understanding the tools in your art better, and being able to do it in a fight is just about creating alive (ie semi free, natural movement with open responses) drills that let you train with a degree of realism before you get into full sparring.

Alan's videos don't say, "just imitate boxing", they say, "this is how you translate these skills from wing chun training to wing chun fighting".

I don't think you've watched your own videos, in the first one he expressly said, that you do wing chun like boxing to make it effective, fine, then why not just learn boxing, ?

 

[DaveB]

What time reference does he say this?
The video opens with him listing differences between his wing chun and boxing. Then he goes on to explain using wing chun principles and techniques...
Then he goes on to say that people confuse the training of wing chun with the application whivhbis why they think what he does is boxing or lacks wing chun methods.

 

[DaveB]

From 6:35 Alan Orr talks about the application of wing chun with gloves on, referencing principles of the style.

 

[drop bear]

one,) de appears to only show his moves on much smaller females and two) he is justify wing Chun by how much its like boxing if you throw out or the pointless / useless stuff, which begs the question of why they teach it at all if its a) pointless and b) useless

People kind of think boxing is a style that works. It isn't. It is the result of what works.

So you put people in a similar environment and they will tend to gravitate towards similar methods.

And you see it in every endeavor. There is a system that just gets better results. Swimming, running, lifting.

I dont get how martial arts gets some sort of free pass. where anything will work. It just doesnt make sense.

 

[DaveB]

Boxing is a game where what "works" is defined by the rules. Hence the lack of highly effective low roundhouse kicks and RNC's.

The reasoning behind this thread is pretty straight forward but I'll lay it out for you one more time. Now this is simplified so please don't nitpick.

All fighting styles punch.
Punches are an effective way to injure an adversary.
Landing a punch is based on NON STYLE SPECIFIC SKILLS:
Like timing,
Distancing,
Positioning,
Speed,
Etc.

Therefore becoming proficient at punching is not dependent on style.
Becoming proficient at punching must therefore be dependent on training.
Training is not the same as a fighting style, it is learning to use a fighting style and though traditional styles have traditional drills and forms, there is not and never was any limitation to what one can include as training.

Thus with no style limitations on training,
And no style limitations on the skills required to land a punch, any style that employs appropriate training will be able to land punches.

Now, rinse and repeat for footwork, dodging, kicking and most other general skills.

 

[jobo]

Boxing is a game where what "works" is defined by the rules. Hence the lack of highly effective low roundhouse kicks and RNC's.

The reasoning behind this thread is pretty straight forward but I'll lay it out for you one more time. Now this is simplified so please don't nitpick.

All fighting styles punch.
Punches are an effective way to injure an adversary.
Landing a punch is based on NON STYLE SPECIFIC SKILLS:
Like timing,
Distancing,
Positioning,
Speed,
Etc.

Therefore becoming proficient at punching is not dependent on style.
Becoming proficient at punching must therefore be dependent on training.
Training is not the same as a fighting style, it is learning to use a fighting style and though traditional styles have traditional drills and forms, there is not and never was any limitation to what one can include as training.

Thus with no style limitations on training,
And no style limitations on the skills required to land a punch, any style that employs appropriate training will be able to land punches.

Now, rinse and repeat for footwork, dodging, kicking and most other general skills.

but how you punch and therefore how much power can be generated is dictated by style.

sure you can add in a boxing punch if you wish, but that won't be included in your instruction, in tma,

just as you won't be instructed in how to kick at a boxing class

rinse and repeat , for head movement and footwork

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Therefore becoming proficient at punching is not dependent on style.

That is true, if we assume all types of punches are roughly equivalent in effectiveness. That would be a difficult argument to make, though, since there is a pretty wide difference in what a punch is, from style to style. The WC punch isn't anything like an NGA punch, which (at most schools) isn't anything like a boxing punch.

 

[DaveB]

That is true, if we assume all types of punches are roughly equivalent in effectiveness. That would be a difficult argument to make, though, since there is a pretty wide difference in what a punch is, from style to style. The WC punch isn't anything like an NGA punch, which (at most schools) isn't anything like a boxing punch.

Absolutely true.

But, we are only looking for "works", not "most efficient".

A less powerful punch being a deciding factor would mean boxing matches can be decided by whackometer. A fighter can compensate by volume, timing, or in the case of martial arts (as opposed to more limited sports like boxing) use of other weapons like elbows.

 

[jobo]

Absolutely true.

But, we are only looking for "works", not "most efficient".

A less powerful punch being a deciding factor would mean boxing matches can be decided by whackometer. A fighter can compensate by volume, timing, or in the case of martial arts (as opposed to more limited sports like boxing) use of other weapons like elbows.

well , the purpose of punch is to a) knock your opposing number out, or b) set him up for a knock out, therefore if your big punch lands and doesn't have the efficiency to do that, then it doesn't work, it only annoys him

 

[drop bear]

Boxing is a game where what "works" is defined by the rules. Hence the lack of highly effective low roundhouse kicks and RNC's.

The reasoning behind this thread is pretty straight forward but I'll lay it out for you one more time. Now this is simplified so please don't nitpick.

All fighting styles punch.
Punches are an effective way to injure an adversary.
Landing a punch is based on NON STYLE SPECIFIC SKILLS:
Like timing,
Distancing,
Positioning,
Speed,
Etc.

Therefore becoming proficient at punching is not dependent on style.
Becoming proficient at punching must therefore be dependent on training.
Training is not the same as a fighting style, it is learning to use a fighting style and though traditional styles have traditional drills and forms, there is not and never was any limitation to what one can include as training.

Thus with no style limitations on training,
And no style limitations on the skills required to land a punch, any style that employs appropriate training will be able to land punches.

Now, rinse and repeat for footwork, dodging, kicking and most other general skills.

Ok so what if the movement is in the rules. But nobody successfully uses it?

Then you can pretty much say it doesn't work. You dont see much chain punching and you are allowed to do it. you dont see much hand trapping. But are allowed to do that. All of these things that are supposed to work. But just don't.

(And hand trapping is pretty simple. If i am punching you with two hands. and you are defending with one hand. you are punching me back with one hand. The guy who can use two hands offensively has the advantage

Which is why as soon as the fight goes off being a drill people whose style relies on using this as a primary fighting mechanic get beat up)

I will lay out my counter in its simplified matter. You train to punch in a correct manner. Kind of assumes you can punch in an incorrect manner.

There is a whole bunch of non style specific mechanics that apply to effective punching. But there is no requirement for a style to adhere to those mechanics. A style can make up any punching it wants.

Any timing it wants.
Any distancing it wants
Any positioning it wants
Any speed it wants.

Just because it is a style doesnt mean it has to work.

If you abandon the concept of style then your arguments make more sense. But you are trying to keep the concept of style and keep the concept of fighting mechanics are not dependant on style.

And that is dumb.

 

[drop bear]

Ok. Here we go.
No requirement to adhere to fighting mechanics.

Use your hip to generate power? Nah screw that.

Pull your hand back to protect your head? What and not be able to chi sau?

Lets just come up with any old idea we want. Because if we train it hard enough our individual atributes will overcome our low percentage concepts.

 

[DaveB]

but how you punch and therefore how much power can be generated is dictated by style.

sure you can add in a boxing punch if you wish, but that won't be included in your instruction, in tma,

just as you won't be instructed in how to kick at a boxing class

rinse and repeat , for head movement and footwork

So a given style may or may not have the most efficient or comprehensive methods for the various skills. This is true, but if you want the style to work I argue that you only need to be able to understand how to get the most out of what is there.

Boxing head movement is a great example. It should be almost useless when kicks and takedowns are involved because it fixes your legs leaving your lower body vulnerable to attack. It's a great example of both how the rules (no low blows) shape the game of boxing but also of a skill that is sub-optimal, unless you know how and when to use it.

No fighting style was handed down by the gods. Every drop of fight knowledge was learned through analyses of what happens both in the ring but more so in training (since we train more than we compete).

Wing chun may not teach head movement like boxing, but in so far as the principles allow, one could through training practices, work out what works for the wing chun practitioner and how to incorporate it.

 

[jobo]

So a given style may or may not have the most efficient or comprehensive methods for the various skills. This is true, but if you want the style to work I argue that you only need to be able to understand how to get the most out of what is there.

Boxing head movement is a great example. It should be almost useless when kicks and takedowns are involved because it fixes your legs leaving your lower body vulnerable to attack. It's a great example of both how the rules (no low blows) shape the game of boxing but also of a skill that is sub-optimal, unless you know how and when to use it.

No fighting style was handed down by the gods. Every drop of fight knowledge was learned through analyses of what happens both in the ring but more so in training (since we train more than we compete).

Wing chun may not teach head movement like boxing, but in so far as the principles allow, one could through training practices, work out what works for the wing chun practitioner and how to incorporate it.

but you have no fixed point of comparison, against who or what are your examples fighting, Boxers don't just stand there moving their head, unless they are Floyd M. And certainly not if someone is trying to kick them, that would be silly

wing Chun against any fast and mobile fighter is a dead duck, its never going to work, you can't hit them as they keep moving in and out and round, you can't stop them hitting you as you have no guard worth the name, against some drunk on the,street it may well work, but so will anything else

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

IMO, one of the major differences between the boxing punch and the CMA punch is when you punch your right fist,:

1. boxing - your left fist may be static idle (not moving).
2. CMA (or Karate) punch - you pull your left fist back at the same time (unless you are using left arm to block your opponent's punch).

In the following clip, not sure which approach that he thinks the WC system is using.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Absolutely true.

But, we are only looking for "works", not "most efficient".

A less powerful punch being a deciding factor would mean boxing matches can be decided by whackometer. A fighter can compensate by volume, timing, or in the case of martial arts (as opposed to more limited sports like boxing) use of other weapons like elbows.

I said "effectiveness" not "efficiency". There's a balance of power, range, adaptability, etc. A more powerful punch needs fewer hits. A faster punch needs less power. And so forth. But that still leaves the question of overall effectiveness.