ANY Fighting Style can work if you train it right.

[Kung Fu Wang]

If I want to use the off-side rotation, I can't really use (and don't need) the leg pressure.

Why is that?

1. Power come from the leg - bottom to up.
2. Use body rotation - back to front.
3. Send power through your arm.

1 and 2 are not mutual exclusive but one after another. As long as you do 1 first and 2 afterward, there is no conflict.

It's a simple trade off.

- With off-side rotation, you punch can be more powerful.
- Without off-side rotation, you can punch out your off-side faster.

 

[DaveB]

but you still won't,address the core,weakness in your theory, that being you won't say who it would work against.
let's say you do what you say and teach a wing Chun man to time his weak punches and move his feet. He is still not going to punch as hard as say a boxer who uses better body mechanics to generate power and has better movement patterns built into his style.

it seems likely then that in any such punching match the boxer will come out best, as he a) punches harder and b) is more,difficult to hit. In that situation its difficult to justify your claim that wing Chun "works"

Fights are won by fighters not styles. Just because the movement Lomanchenko uses is in boxing that doesn't make every fighter Lomanchenko.

This is why I think the idea of defining whether or not a style works based on winning fights as ludicrous: there will never be a big enough sample studied to draw any conclusions about a win. The winner, whichever style, may just be the better fighter, have better reactions etc.

To my mind the style works if the person fighting isn't making objectively tactically silly mistakes and can mount offence and defence that require skill to beat.

Note this means that the winners style can still fail to "work", though it is less likely.

Also the keen eyed of you will have spotted that anyone appropriately trained in the non style specific core skills I've mentioned should be successful under the above criteria.

That's because any style can work if you train it right.

Lastly, here's a guy trained in the manner I suggest using wing chun to win a boxing match:

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Regardless of which one has an advantage we are still discussing a systematic advantage.

I think I follow you on that one DB. I do think there are advantages and disadvantages to each power delivery, and those may be system-oriented, but even that can vary. I don't think I punch the same way as many in NGA, because I use and teach more than one power generation method. I don't find a specific power generation method as inherent (or, more accurately, inherently unique) within NGA. We move in circles and straight lines, so can generate power both ways. We sometimes unify both sides of the body (so can use the generation method KFW mentions), and sometimes separate them (so can use the method I referred to).

Admittedly, that variation is because we're not primarily a striking art. Within an art with a primary focus on striking, the advantages and disadvantages are probably more inherent in the system.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why is that?

1. Power come from the leg - bottom to up.
2. Use body rotation - back to front.
3. Send power through your arm.

1 and 2 are not mutual exclusive but one after another. As long as you do 1 first and 2 afterward, there is no conflict.

It's a simple trade off.

- With off-side rotation, you punch can be more powerful.
- Without off-side rotation, you can punch out your off-side faster.

Off-side rotation moves the center around, not from, the driving leg. If I drive from the leg, the leg is the power, and pulling back the off-side isn't necessary, nor particularly beneficial.

 

[jobo]

Fights are won by fighters not styles. Just because the movement Lomanchenko uses is in boxing that doesn't make every fighter Lomanchenko.

This is why I think the idea of defining whether or not a style works based on winning fights as ludicrous: there will never be a big enough sample studied to draw any conclusions about a win. The winner, whichever style, may just be the better fighter, have better reactions etc.

To my mind the style works if the person fighting isn't making objectively tactically silly mistakes and can mount offence and defence that require skill to beat.

Note this means that the winners style can still fail to "work", though it is less likely.

Also the keen eyed of you will have spotted that anyone appropriately trained in the non style specific core skills I've mentioned should be successful under the above criteria.

That's because any style can work if you train it right.

Lastly, here's a guy trained in the manner I suggest using wing chun to win a boxing match:

which bit of that was supposed to be wing chun? He punched like a boxer, he had a guard like a boxer and his footwork was like a boxer, I've already agreed if you teach a wing chimney boxing he will be a lot better

 

[DaveB]

which bit of that was supposed to be wing chun? He punched like a boxer, he had a guard like a boxer and his footwork was like a boxer, I've already agreed if you teach a wing chimney boxing he will be a lot better

You'll have to take it up with Alan Orr. He says he teaches wing chun not boxing.

I've watched a few of Alan's vids now and I can see the elements he mentions that identify the fighting style.

Here's a challenge for you: find me a video of any style that while fighting with boxing gloves on doesn't look like boxing.

 

[jobo]

You'll have to take it up with Alan Orr. He says he teaches wing chun not boxing.

I've watched a few of Alan's vids now and I can see the elements he mentions that identify the fighting style.

Here's a challenge for you: find me a video of any style that while fighting with boxing gloves on doesn't look like boxing.

well your posting em up as evidence the least you can do is support them rather than default to ask someone else,

are you really suggesting that all you need is to put gloves on to radically change your style

 

[Gerry Seymour]

well your posting em up as evidence the least you can do is support them rather than default to ask someone else,

are you really suggesting that all you need is to put gloves on to radically change your style

Heavy gloves will eliminate many small movements that requires light relaxation, and anything that operates on touch-feel. I don't know enough of WC to know if that would change the entire look by eliminating the things that most "look" WC, but I suppose it's possible.

 

[DaveB]

well your posting em up as evidence the least you can do is support them rather than default to ask someone else,

are you really suggesting that all you need is to put gloves on to radically change your style

Alan Orr has numerous videos explaining why there are differences between what his style looks like in training vs application. I should have said to look them up rather than ask him.

As someone who has studied application vs codification (ie kata) there is no mystery for me.

The fact is that there are only so many ways to punch and not a lot of difference between them. If all you can do is punch in a match, and you have limited space and gloves on stopping you from sticking or grappling and you can't kick, then certain tactics are going to become the only way you can defend yourself. Tactics like holding a high guard or hooking around the opponents guard.

This is because boxing is a game shaped by its rules, not a fighting style.

Boxers don't use the snapping backfist or hammerfist strikes because the rules say you hit with the front of the glove. Boxers don't low kick because kicks aren't allowed. So because of the environment created by these rules the boxer moves, guards and fights in a certain way.

Conversely a martial art that considers all possible attacks without limitations will move and behave differently. But start applying those game limits and the martial artist must adapt to the new environment.
So yes, to a degree, putting on gloves changes the style and the more boxing limits you add the more boxing like the style "should" become to adapt.

 

[jobo]

Alan Orr has numerous videos explaining why there are differences between what his style looks like in training vs application. I should have said to look them up rather than ask him.

As someone who has studied application vs codification (ie kata) there is no mystery for me.

The fact is that there are only so many ways to punch and not a lot of difference between them. If all you can do is punch in a match, and you have limited space and gloves on stopping you from sticking or grappling and you can't kick, then certain tactics are going to become the only way you can defend yourself. Tactics like holding a high guard or hooking around the opponents guard.

This is because boxing is a game shaped by its rules, not a fighting style.

Boxers don't use the snapping backfist or hammerfist strikes because the rules say you hit with the front of the glove. Boxers don't low kick because kicks aren't allowed. So because of the environment created by these rules the boxer moves, guards and fights in a certain way.

Conversely a martial art that considers all possible attacks without limitations will move and behave differently. But start applying those game limits and the martial artist must adapt to the new environment.
So yes, to a degree, putting on gloves changes the style and the more boxing limits you add the more boxing like the style "should" become to adapt.

so all those really rubbish martial arts have to do is put on gloves and they are transformed into good fighters. You should tell them

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

find me a video of any style that while fighting with boxing gloves on doesn't look like boxing.

With gloves on, you may still be able to do Beng, but you won't be able to do Tan and Fu. Also it's difficult to use Tan Da to separate your opponent's arms and take his center (IMO, this is one of the WC main skills). Your gloves are just too big that your arms cannot go through the space between your opponent's arms. If you don't have sharp drill head, you won't be able to drill a hole.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

so all those really rubbish martial arts have to do is put on gloves and they are transformed into good fighters. You should tell them

You do realize that's not what he said, right?

 

[jobo]

You do realize that's not what he said, right?

its a reasonable interpretation, put gloves on and you cant do all those silly low % moves, so you have to learn to move and punch properly , its close enough

 

[Gerry Seymour]

its a reasonable interpretation, put gloves on and you cant do all those silly low % moves, so you have to learn to move and punch properly , its close enough

What he discussed was what changes are necessary for the gloves, not that the gloves made them magically skilled.

 

[DaveB]

so all those really rubbish martial arts have to do is put on gloves and they are transformed into good fighters. You should tell them

That's not even remotely close to what I said.

 

[jobo]

What he discussed was what changes are necessary for the gloves, not that the gloves made them magically skilled.

the gloves cut out the trapping etal, as soon as you lose all the nonsense techniques they are more skilled

 

[DaveB]

the gloves cut out the trapping etal, as soon as you lose all the nonsense techniques they are more skilled

That's not how skill works.

A skill or a level of skill is something you acquire. You don't get more of something by getting rid of something else (except space).

Rather than continuing down this nonsensical misrepresentation of my point why not just re-read the post?

It's pretty straightforward: you adapt to your environment. A boxing ring and the limitations of boxing rules constitute a different environment than the one wing chun was created for, so you adapt.

Nothing about magic or skill, just reasons why things change in a boxing match or mma bout or street fight etc.

 

[drop bear]

I think I follow you on that one DB. I do think there are advantages and disadvantages to each power delivery, and those may be system-oriented, but even that can vary. I don't think I punch the same way as many in NGA, because I use and teach more than one power generation method. I don't find a specific power generation method as inherent (or, more accurately, inherently unique) within NGA. We move in circles and straight lines, so can generate power both ways. We sometimes unify both sides of the body (so can use the generation method KFW mentions), and sometimes separate them (so can use the method I referred to).

Admittedly, that variation is because we're not primarily a striking art. Within an art with a primary focus on striking, the advantages and disadvantages are probably more inherent in the system.

What we call the paper rock sissors effect. Or mohumid ali's rope a dope where his system defeated a better indiviual. (or at leats what is popularly believed)


Now we can assume all these different systems kind of even out. Or even out depending on the user. But there is no reason for that. Some will but some will just be more efficient across the board. At this point we can look at styles like systema. Whith whatever notion makes them think this works.

 

[drop bear]

That's not how skill works.

A skill or a level of skill is something you acquire. You don't get more of something by getting rid of something else (except space).

Rather than continuing down this nonsensical misrepresentation of my point why not just re-read the post?

It's pretty straightforward: you adapt to your environment. A boxing ring and the limitations of boxing rules constitute a different environment than the one wing chun was created for, so you adapt.

Nothing about magic or skill, just reasons why things change in a boxing match or mma bout or street fight etc.

Boxers are generally better than your average rooftop thug though.

So if we are going to wax lyrical about design. Wing Chun wasn't designed to handle anywhere near the complexity of a boxer.

And so people understand what I am presenting in this video. These towns dont produce soft men.
Fred Brophy, the last boxing tent showman - ABC North West Qld - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

[DaveB]

Boxers are generally better than your average rooftop thug though.

So if we are going to wax lyrical about design. Wing Chun wasn't designed to handle anywhere near the complexity of a boxer.

And so people understand what I am presenting in this video. These towns dont produce soft men.
Fred Brophy, the last boxing tent showman - ABC North West Qld - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Boxing wasn't designed. It's a game that people trained to get really good at. Because it was accessible and popular and competetive you got a greater variety of competitors and a faster trial and error weeding process for what worked within the confines of the game.

Now just because I call it a game doesn't mean I don't respect it, I very much do. But it's a different animal to a martial art. There are a lot of plusses to boxing, in fact I think boxing should be considered basic training for all striking arts because it's the best training tool for using the hands. But the limits it has mean that martial arts represent an increase in sophistication and complexity.

The problem you see of TMAists getting beat up by boxers is a combination of those practitioners having forgotten the basics of combat on which boxing is based, and of the limitations of the arena in which the tmaists are fighting and most importantly the unevolved training that they are using.

The last is the most important point because through training exercises like boxing we put ourselves through that weeding process, but not for our techniques; we were out our misconceptions about combat and so relearn those basics which in turn help us understand how to adapt to new environments which will inform how we train for those environments... and round and round it goes.

Training is key. Training is all.