articles in WCI magazine...

[Juany118]

Oh, I can believe that you wing chun contains these things, that you move differently, have different strategy, don't use contact reflex and sensing intent that ALL wing chun is reknown for. But then WHY is it SOOO different to everyone else's wing chun? Is it even wing chun..sure doesn't look like it. Anwer me that one!

Maybe your teacher changed a bit more than he is letting on to you?

It's not different though. I study a completely different Lineage, heck one LFJ hasn't been overly kind to in other debates, but in TWC I don't see the issue boxing is supposed to solve. It may have to do with how it is taught though. The most obvious example is that the picture perfect man sau/wu say is taught to impart principles. As Sifu Keith Mazza (GM William Cheung's official US rep) says, "no one actually fights this way."

I think the origin of the difference may be this. Both WSL and GM Cheung we're almost notorious for their participation in the roof top challenge fight culture. They fought A LOT against many different styles, some of which are classic "long fist" TCMAs. This likely influenced the WC/VT they teach a great deal.

This is why I think threads like this need to specify the WC that is being referenced because WC/VT is not monolithic.

That is also assuming the problem exists in Lineages I am not familiar with. While he hasn't commented on the issue at length, Joy I believe has made it clear he sees the issues raised regarding range as a solution in search of a problem. He will probably forget more about WC over the length of his lifetime than most of us will ever actually know.

 

[KPM]

Deficiencies of your supposedly YM derived WC.

 

[paitingman]

I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

"You do this type of stance and this type of footwork. this is a great long range game (when you aren't allowed to kick and don't have to worry about kicks)"

but in mma/real fighting/ and many other systems, you do have to worry about kicks. So the footwork needs to be different.

@KPM keeps pointing out that all your pointing to in a WC/VT long range game is kicks and strategy. But kicks, when allowed, are the starting point of every long range game. Simple kicks to the leg/knee (and the footwork and tactics to deal with them) would be a huge part of Boxing's long range game, if it were allowed.

 

[LFJ]

I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

This is true and because the WC he learned had no long-range game, and he is now attempting to draw a long-range game from boxing, while not considering the context it is working under. A grave error if looking to make a functional free-fighting method.

 

[drop bear]

Deficiencies of your supposedly YM derived WC.

In a cross training thread. Everyone has to start with a deficiency.

 

[drop bear]

I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

"You do this type of stance and this type of footwork. this is a great long range game (when you aren't allowed to kick and don't have to worry about kicks)"

but in mma/real fighting/ and many other systems, you do have to worry about kicks. So the footwork needs to be different.

@KPM keeps pointing out that all your pointing to in a WC/VT long range game is kicks and strategy. But kicks, when allowed, are the starting point of every long range game. Simple kicks to the leg/knee (and the footwork and tactics to deal with them) would be a huge part of Boxing's long range game, if it were allowed.

But it is about taking steps forwards. So you look at the deficiency in your game. Fix it then look at the deficiency in that game.

But you have to do it to get a good grasp. On what to do next.

 

[KPM]

I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

"You do this type of stance and this type of footwork. this is a great long range game (when you aren't allowed to kick and don't have to worry about kicks)"

but in mma/real fighting/ and many other systems, you do have to worry about kicks. So the footwork needs to be different.

@KPM keeps pointing out that all your pointing to in a WC/VT long range game is kicks and strategy. But kicks, when allowed, are the starting point of every long range game. Simple kicks to the leg/knee (and the footwork and tactics to deal with them) would be a huge part of Boxing's long range game, if it were allowed.

Uh, no. Have you read all of the discussion? I have maintained since the very beginning that Wing Chun was designed for and optimized for close range fighting. And that Wing Chun may have a workable "long range strategy" that gets the Wing Chun fighter to the preferable close range, but this is not the same thing as having a fully developed "long range game" equivalent to methods that were designed to work at long range....like boxing, kickboxing, TKD, etc. I have never said there was anything wrong with kicking! In fact, I pointed out that low-line kicks can be easily added to a boxing "engine" with minimal changes in the mechanics. I have simply been saying since the beginning that there is room for improvement in Wing Chun's ability to fight from long range, should someone choose to want to improve it. And people have gotten all "butthurt" by the suggestion that Wing Chun's long range abilities could be improved! Are you "butthurt" too? Or have you just failed to follow the actual conversation and let all of LFJ's diversions distract you?

 

[paitingman]

Uh, no. Have you read all of the discussion? I have maintained since the very beginning that Wing Chun was designed for and optimized for close range fighting. And that Wing Chun may have a workable "long range strategy" that gets the Wing Chun fighter to the preferable close range, but this is not the same thing as having a fully developed "long range game" equivalent to methods that were designed to work at long range....like boxing, kickboxing, TKD, etc. I have never said there was anything wrong with kicking! In fact, I pointed out that low-line kicks can be easily added to a boxing "engine" with minimal changes in the mechanics. I have simply been saying since the beginning that there is room for improvement in Wing Chun's ability to fight from long range, should someone choose to want to improve it. And people have gotten all "butthurt" by the suggestion that Wing Chun's long range abilities could be improved! Are you "butthurt" too? Or have you just failed to follow the actual conversation and let all of LFJ's diversions distract you?

I was simply trying to offer a potential bridge between stand points.
I have followed the whole thread, but don't see eye to eye with you the whole way through. That was just my take on it.
You seem to be pretty defensive when someone does not support everything you say. To the point where you make repeated posts like this and even bring up other what should have been non offensive interactions from other threads.
Your behavior and reactions do appear to be a bit unreasonable at times. Not necessarily a fault of yours, but your reactions and how deeply you take disagreements are not what I would call typical.
I'm not sure really how I, or anyone on this forum should interact with you..

 

[karatejj]

People like KPM get butthurt when I spell it out in full detail, even though recently his threads have been admitting what I have been saying all along. I don't care to convince anyone. Like KPM, they'll come to realize it on their own.

What are you saying, don't act all coy.

So your wing chun is different- what's the reason? (this should be a good one)..

 

[karatejj]

Uh, no. Have you read all of the discussion? I have maintained since the very beginning that Wing Chun was designed for and optimized for close range fighting. And that Wing Chun may have a workable "long range strategy" that gets the Wing Chun fighter to the preferable close range, but this is not the same thing as having a fully developed "long range game" equivalent to methods that were designed to work at long range....like boxing, kickboxing, TKD, etc

You are 100% right for wing chun. It all about that close range game..or why do chi sau to develop teh reflex action??

The clip LFJ showed is not like this, so think we have to ask why is it different to the wing chun the rest of us all know??

LFJ is obvs doing somthing different. Is it even wing chun??? Does he have the special secret wing chun the rest of us didn't get?????

 

[LFJ]

In a cross training thread. Everyone has to start with a deficiency.

This is not a cross-training thread. It starts off with statements from two lesser-known YM students that appear to support VT's long-range game that apparently not everyone received.

Also, as has been explained to you before, cross-training isn't necessarily to remedy a deficiency.
It can just be to expand one's toolset, adding functional method to functional method.

A striking system that doesn't address the long-range game has a deficiency, a gap to be filled.

 

[LFJ]

I pointed out that low-line kicks can be easily added to a boxing "engine" with minimal changes in the mechanics.

Too bad it's not just a matter of adding kicks to a boxing "engine".

You have to consider kick defense, which the boxing "engine" does not.

This leaves its stance, stepping patterns, and power generation methods uniquely vulnerable when the opponent is allowed to kick.

Let's not forget what happened to the American Kickboxing champion in "The Fight That Changed History"...

Taken out on a stretcher because leg kicks were not legal in his sport and hence the footwork method functioned on the assumption that this danger need not be factored in.

If you're looking to use your long-range game in free-fighting, this danger must be factored in.

That means the boxing "engine" will need to be completely reworked, and gaps-filled for it to free fight against kickers.

You might wanna give it a deeper think during your "Wing Chun Boxing" project...

 

[KPM]

[I was simply trying to offer a potential bridge between stand points.

---You wrote: I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

Which is completely wrong and not what I have been saying. I offered a description of what boxing can do in long range as an example. But I haven't limited what I've been saying to boxing. I've said more than once that other methods have a "long range game" as well. So I'm not sure what you think you are "bridging."

----You also wrote: "You do this type of stance and this type of footwork. this is a great long range game (when you aren't allowed to kick and don't have to worry about kicks)"

Which is also completely wrong and not what I have been saying. I never said you aren't allowed to kick. And I never said that a boxing/Wing Chun hybrid at long range would NOT kick and wouldn't train to defend against kicks. That's just plain common sense, isn't it? And as I already pointed out I noted before that you can add low-line kicks to boxing mechanics with no problem. What I have said, when goofballs try to say that boxing wouldn't work at long range because people can kick them, is that I didn't understand how someone could think that a method with such fast and evasive footwork as boxing wouldn't be able to adapt to defending against kicks with a little training and exposure. I never said that a boxing/Wing Chun hybrid wouldn't have to worry about kicks in mixed competitions. And I've never tried to defend "pure" western boxing as viable in mixed competitions. Again, you are letting all of LJF's diversions distract you from my real points.


I have followed the whole thread,

---I don't think you have. At least not very well, given that you are misrepresenting what I have been saying.


You seem to be pretty defensive when someone does not support everything you say. To the point where you make repeated posts like this and even bring up other what should have been non offensive interactions from other threads.

---I make repeated posts to clarify what I have been saying because the "butthurt" people keep trying to twist it around into something else. These threads make wide tangents when LFJ and others throw in diversions so I repeat my premise so that it is clear where I am coming from. I have no investment in being "defensive" about what I am saying. I just want it heard correctly and acknowledged. If you want to talk about being "defensive"....that's LFJ! Are you guys buddies or something? Because to call me "defensive" after LFJ has gone on a crusade of character assassination against me, and has gone to great lengths to try to prove me wrong....just seems a bit odd. He is the one defending his "pure WSLVT."

Your behavior and reactions do appear to be a bit unreasonable at times.

---So you think it is unreasonable to expect people to actually follow what I've really been saying? Its unreasonable to repeat my points when people have tried to divert the discussion away from those points or misstate what I have actually said? Its unreasonable to apply simple common sense? I will acknowledge one thing....it has turned out to be unreasonable on my part to expect people with such dogmatically held beliefs about their Wing Chun to recognize common sense ways their Wing Chun could be improved when pointed out to them! You never answered as to whether you are one of those people that are now "butthurt" from idea that the long range abilities of your Wing Chun could be improved upon.

 

[karatejj]

And as I already pointed out I noted before that you can add low-line kicks to boxing mechanics with no problem. What I have said, when goofballs try to say that boxing wouldn't work at long range because people can kick them, is that I didn't understand how someone could think that a method with such fast and evasive footwork as boxing wouldn't be able to adapt to defending against kicks with a little training and exposure

Hey dude, much as I love your wing chun boxing project, have 2 say ur wrong about adding low line kicks to boxing footwork with no problem.

See this link for all the detail but basicaly boxing stance allows you 2 sit down on punches for power but very exposed to kicks. Muy Thai stance focus on kicks defence but weak 4 punches because light front foot nd feet turn out. They r not close methods, very different

I think the answer u seem to be getting close is ditch the low kicks and kick defense and focus on boxing punches and chi sau for close range skillz. I know for fact that i would trust my life to punches and getting in close rather than kicking. When was last time u ever saw kicks end a fight in the streets? Never? Lol thought so

Stick with what ur doing and don't listen to teh h8ers

 

[karatejj]

Sorry, forgot link

How do you post it?

 

[karatejj]

duh, I got it i think

Muay Thai Stance Analysis | Muay Thai Scholar

 

[KPM]

Hey dude, much as I love your wing chun boxing project, have 2 say ur wrong about adding low line kicks to boxing footwork with no problem.

---Pananjakman is essentially low-line kicks added to a boxing mechanic. Works great! I've trained it!

boxing stance allows you 2 sit down on punches for power but very exposed to kicks. Muy Thai stance focus on kicks defence but weak 4 punches because light front foot nd feet turn out. They r not close methods, very different

---True. But plenty of MMA fighters use a stance that is relatively forward weighted and do fine defending kicks. Then when in close they will "sit down" into that deeper boxing stance for power punches. But they are still using the evasive and mobile boxing/kickboxing footwork at long range.

I think the answer u seem to be getting close is ditch the low kicks and kick defense and focus on boxing punches and chi sau for close range skillz.

---No. As LJF has pointed out and I haven't disagreed with.....kicks and kick defense are important at long range in mixed sparring/fighting.


Stick with what ur doing and don't listen to teh h8ers

---Thanks man! If you saw my youtube channel, keep following along. Eventually I will do a lesson on the low-line kicking and kick defenses.

 

[Grenadier]

Admin's Note:

Please keep this discussion civil. This is your only warning, as warning points will be issued for those who continue down this path.

 

[karatejj]

---Thanks man! If you saw my youtube channel, keep following along. Eventually I will do a lesson on the low-line kicking and kick defenses.

Hey I will, you got something good going on there. I hope u give more of the boxing side tho..Muy Thai and kicks, that stuff I not really into. Never seen a kick end a real fight in the street! Punches do it all the time!

 

[paitingman]

[I was simply trying to offer a potential bridge between stand points.

---You wrote: I think KPM has his idea of what a "long rang game" is completely framed within the rules of boxing. Not fighting.

Which is completely wrong and not what I have been saying. I offered a description of what boxing can do in long range as an example. But I haven't limited what I've been saying to boxing. I've said more than once that other methods have a "long range game" as well. So I'm not sure what you think you are "bridging."

----You also wrote: "You do this type of stance and this type of footwork. this is a great long range game (when you aren't allowed to kick and don't have to worry about kicks)"

Which is also completely wrong and not what I have been saying. I never said you aren't allowed to kick. And I never said that a boxing/Wing Chun hybrid at long range would NOT kick and wouldn't train to defend against kicks. That's just plain common sense, isn't it? And as I already pointed out I noted before that you can add low-line kicks to boxing mechanics with no problem. What I have said, when goofballs try to say that boxing wouldn't work at long range because people can kick them, is that I didn't understand how someone could think that a method with such fast and evasive footwork as boxing wouldn't be able to adapt to defending against kicks with a little training and exposure. I never said that a boxing/Wing Chun hybrid wouldn't have to worry about kicks in mixed competitions. And I've never tried to defend "pure" western boxing as viable in mixed competitions. Again, you are letting all of LJF's diversions distract you from my real points.


I have followed the whole thread,

---I don't think you have. At least not very well, given that you are misrepresenting what I have been saying.


You seem to be pretty defensive when someone does not support everything you say. To the point where you make repeated posts like this and even bring up other what should have been non offensive interactions from other threads.

---I make repeated posts to clarify what I have been saying because the "butthurt" people keep trying to twist it around into something else. These threads make wide tangents when LFJ and others throw in diversions so I repeat my premise so that it is clear where I am coming from. I have no investment in being "defensive" about what I am saying. I just want it heard correctly and acknowledged. If you want to talk about being "defensive"....that's LFJ! Are you guys buddies or something? Because to call me "defensive" after LFJ has gone on a crusade of character assassination against me, and has gone to great lengths to try to prove me wrong....just seems a bit odd. He is the one defending his "pure WSLVT."

Your behavior and reactions do appear to be a bit unreasonable at times.

---So you think it is unreasonable to expect people to actually follow what I've really been saying? Its unreasonable to repeat my points when people have tried to divert the discussion away from those points or misstate what I have actually said? Its unreasonable to apply simple common sense? I will acknowledge one thing....it has turned out to be unreasonable on my part to expect people with such dogmatically held beliefs about their Wing Chun to recognize common sense ways their Wing Chun could be improved when pointed out to them! You never answered as to whether you are one of those people that are now "butthurt" from idea that the long range abilities of your Wing Chun could be improved upon.

All this is why I made sure to preface it with "I THINK..." I was only hinging my point on the possibility that a disagreement may stem from this standpoint.

A simple "No, you've missed the mark. I'm saying this ___" would suffice. Instead we get your typical hostility just because people either disagree with or don't understand you.

Not everyone here who disagrees with you is "butthurt" by what you say, conspiring together and out to get you, or vindictively trying to "misrepresent you"