Feelin' down...and a little advice?

[KamonGuy2]

No not really. I don't go to MMA gyms or mix up movements. My primary art is wing chun. But if I go to ground, I'm not going to frantically attempt to hit the attacker, because it is a bad position, with no possibility of hip rotation. I can hit pretty hard using just brute force, but so could my attacker!

I would rather neutralise him with BJJ, recover and then get back into wing chun mode

I would challenge any wing chunner to start off on the floor with an average grappler or street fighter and still win the fight.

 

[Flying Crane]

But if I go to ground, I'm not going to frantically attempt to hit the attacker, because it is a bad position, with no possibility of hip rotation. I can hit pretty hard using just brute force, but so could my attacker!

wing chun includes much more than just chain punching. There are a lot of trapping moves that can work well on the floor, until you manage to get back to your feet.

I would rather neutralise him with BJJ, recover and then get back into wing chun mode

If you have neutralized him with BJJ, then I suppose you have choked him out or dislocated his ankle or shoulder or something and the fight is over. You don't need to get back up and go into wing chun mode.

I would challenge any wing chunner to start off on the floor with an average grappler or street fighter and still win the fight.

Why would you ever BEGIN a fight on the ground? This just makes no sense. Something had to happen to get you there first.

Self defense is not about staying on the ground and attempting to win the submission. That is the realm of competition. In self defense, if you go to the ground then you need to work for the first chance to get back up and get away. You NEVER want to stick around and win the submission. That doesn't matter. All that matters is getting away with minimal injury.

If you try to defeat a specialist in his area of specialty, you will lose. Never let him force you into his game. Make him play your game.

Do you think that the average street punk, against whom you might need to defend yourself (not compete against, it's a different thing), is going to have training in BJJ? I seriously doubt it...

 

[Sukerkin]

If you try to defeat a specialist in his area of specialty, you will lose. Never let him force you into his game. Make him play your game.

This is very important, important enough for me to repeat.

I don't know how this thread started to show signs of mutating yet again into a "Martial Arts don't work" fest but I do wish people would think once in a while about how and why the arts were developed.

Contrast that with the lineage of 'street brawling' or MMA aggressive sports.

Which were designed from the outset to kill when your weapons were unavailable? At base level, martial arts are not about 'playing' at fighting or winning on points.

As to training in more than one art, that's a touch less clear cut. My usual answer is don't train in more than one until you're actually any good in the first. The division of effort tends to mean that you're less good at both. If you have the time to devote solely to martial training and have the knack for it tho', then by all means do more than one.

On the anecdotal front, in empty hand 'work', I've never felt disadvantaged knowing only kung fu. It has no emphasis on ground work per se, other than the short, horrid, strikes needed to get away from would-be grapplers. However, I was fairly sure that unless I didn't see it coming, I wouldn't end up on the ground anyway. Manoever and evasion are things kung fu emphasises quite well. If you get 'rushed and crushed' then the not-very-advertised techniques need to be used - the ones that get you locked up for more than just Breach of the Peace or Common Assault.

I realise I'm getting a bit too deeply serious here, so I'll shut up - I blame the excellent Verdelho I'm cossetting right now .

 

[SilatFan]

Threads like this (and the attitudes and misconceptions they reveal) are one of the reasons I didn’t stay in WC for long. There is so much talking done in the average WC class about how technical, scientific and principal based WC is as well as how it “proven” to be made for the smaller person, and blah, blah, blah… In the beginning it creates a false sense of security in the student and after a few years it creates a real arrogance and then the student is so invested in believing the propaganda that they refuse to acknowledge the truth and eventually begin to regurgitate it to the next generation. Any statement that implies that their art isn’t perfect and doesn’t have ALL the answers is taken as a personal indictment on all that is holy. Instead of continuing to grow, instead of continuing to learn they become further and further separated from the rest of the world and reality. Instead of helping others avoid this trap they try to get others to fall into it because to do otherwise would mean that they were “wrong” (in other words it’s about their ego and their fear).
This same statement could be attributed to just about every MA out there but as someone that has study many arts for many years WC, in my experience, tends to be guilty of this to a higher degree than any other that I’ve ever encountered.

Nyrotic:
Follow Kamon Guy’s advice. There definitely are some other good responses on this thread but his are the ones that stood out to me the most at this time. Definitely continue to study WC and do your best to learn it but if anyone tries to tell you that it has the answers to defending yourself on the ground then they are either grossly misinformed or lying to you (and themselves) outright and please refer to the first paragraph. Grappling is a REAL issue for self-defense. Just because you wouldn’t recommend trying to use it on someone because it’s a better idea to stay on your feet does not mean that it won’t be devastating to you when it’s used on you. Reference your own training experience with two untrained grapplers. It is one thing “untrained” street fighters do naturally. If “self-defense” is why you are training then get some ground training as well as – not necessarily instead of – your WC.

Good luck and have fun!

 

[brocklee]

Threads like this (and the attitudes and misconceptions they reveal) are one of the reasons I didn’t stay in WC for long. There is so much talking done in the average WC class about how technical, scientific and principal based WC is as well as how it “proven” to be made for the smaller person, and blah, blah, blah… In the beginning it creates a false sense of security in the student and after a few years it creates a real arrogance and then the student is so invested in believing the propaganda that they refuse to acknowledge the truth and eventually begin to regurgitate it to the next generation. Any statement that implies that their art isn’t perfect and doesn’t have ALL the answers is taken as a personal indictment on all that is holy. Instead of continuing to grow, instead of continuing to learn they become further and further separated from the rest of the world and reality. Instead of helping others avoid this trap they try to get others to fall into it because to do otherwise would mean that they were “wrong” (in other words it’s about their ego and their fear).
This same statement could be attributed to just about every MA out there but as someone that has study many arts for many years WC, in my experience, tends to be guilty of this to a higher degree than any other that I’ve ever encountered.

Nyrotic:
Follow Kamon Guy’s advice. There definitely are some other good responses on this thread but his are the ones that stood out to me the most at this time. Definitely continue to study WC and do your best to learn it but if anyone tries to tell you that it has the answers to defending yourself on the ground then they are either grossly misinformed or lying to you (and themselves) outright and please refer to the first paragraph. Grappling is a REAL issue for self-defense. Just because you wouldn’t recommend trying to use it on someone because it’s a better idea to stay on your feet does not mean that it won’t be devastating to you when it’s used on you. Reference your own training experience with two untrained grapplers. It is one thing “untrained” street fighters do naturally. If “self-defense” is why you are training then get some ground training as well as – not necessarily instead of – your WC.

Good luck and have fun!

Sounds like you had one of THOSE sifus. Sorry to hear it.

 

[Tanizaki]

Well, it's very hard to spar and not lose if using WC. The reason being is that WC is a lawless style and can only be effective if used at full force.

I've heard this from practitioners of a number of styles, but the majority are WC people. It is not persuasive. If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?

 

[brocklee]

I've heard this from practitioners of a number of styles, but the majority are WC people. It is not persuasive. If it makes you lose when there are rules, what makes you think you'll win when there are no rules?

HAHA Welcome back. We missed you

 

[Tanizaki]

Ok, so you're a MMA fighter then. The pieces are falling together.

I don't see what's wrong with MMA. What difference does it make if you win with a roundhouse to the face, a choke, or a chain punch?

 

[Tanizaki]

HAHA Welcome back. We missed you

Thanks. I look forward to your responsive reply.

 

[Sukerkin]

Not to be horribly negative, Tanizaki but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.

Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.

I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why? I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge. Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?

 

[brocklee]

Not to be horribly negative, Tanizaki but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.

Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.

I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why? I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge. Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?

The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad. WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC. This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.

WC is very effective and only at full blast.

 

[Sukerkin]

Cheers Brocklee :tup:.

 

[Tanizaki]

Not to be horribly negative, Tanizaki but that question sets aside one of the core tenets of any martial art's raison d'etre - kill the attacker or inflict such harm on him that he can no longer attack.

Gee, then I wonder why there is competition for western boxing, judo, muay thai, kendo, karate, or any other number of martial arts?

Some arts have major techniques that if toned down simply don't have the effect they were designed for - introduce rules (such as 'Don't kill your opponent') and the art's perceived effectiveness drops dramatically.

This is still unpersuasive. Punches and kicks are major techniques.

I can see that there seems to a large anti-Wing-Chun tide rising here and I'm interested in why? I've not studied WC, other than those elements that were enveloped within JKD which in turn got swallowed into Lau Gar Kung Fu, so I have no frame of reference to judge. Can anyone help provide some illumination on this?

I practice WC, so I obviously am not anti-WC. However, I think "I would beat you if there were no rules" is a weak retort. The rules constrain both members of the fight equally, so what makes you think that your "no rules" fighting is going to be better than the "no rules" fighting of the guy who just wiped the floor with you?

 

[theletch1]

The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad. WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC. This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.

WC is very effective and only at full blast.

This is also one of the complaints that I hear about aikido. The concepts used in aikido are very counter-instinctive and take a long time to become proficient with. Much of the training in the dojo at the lower ranks is done with a somewhat or completely compliant uke giving the new student a sense of competence that is not really there. Take that to the street too soon and you're in big trouble. WC and aikido both are very much up close and personal arts instead of keeping a certain distance for a punch or kick. When done correctly and proficiently both of these arts tend to make things look way too easy to those who do not practice the art.

 

[Tanizaki]

The recent flood of negativity towards WC comes from haters or practitioners that have given up and blame it for their street fight that went bad. WC shouldn't be used too early and the effectiveness that is felt by the young student during training isn't yet effective in a street fight because they truly don't understand what's going on behind the scenes when it comes to WC. This happens a lot and is the main reason why people underestimate WC and what it's capable of when learned properly.

I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced. Still, he should be able to do better against untrained fighters, no matter what style he practices.

WC is very effective and only at full blast.

This is a tautology. Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.

 

[brocklee]

I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced. Still, he should be able to do better against untrained fighters, no matter what style he practices.



This is a tautology. Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.

YAAAY!

 

[brocklee]

YAAAY!

The reason I say this is because you may have read what I was saying, but you weren't hearing what was said.

 

[Sukerkin]

I think perhaps that we're talking apples and oranges, Tani. I'm not sure we'll ever agree because we see the world through entirely different eyes and yet we think we're trying to talk about the same thing.

I'm not being flatly contradictory but I feel your final point is disingenuous and I hope that you are really aware of the realities of pitting someone trained to fight within boundaries against someone who is not.

That said, it is of course the case that kicks and punches are a couple of the major categories of types of attack and that there are a considerable number of variants on both. Whatever the variant, the only thing that matters is that you put the energy where you want it. Sometimes that target is simple blunt trauma; other times it's somewhat more lethal. Of course, a lethal punch can be thrown by the most untrained of individuals, which is why getting into a fight in the first place when you can avoid it is insane.

As to why competition's exist these days for martial arts, well that's a whole other subject that is worthy of a thread of it's own. Personally, I'm not in favour of them as being indicative of anything other than being able to win competitions.

Anyhow, injuries mean that empty hand conflict is a thing of the past for me (sad that one bike accident can wipe away more than a decade of training) so the whole topic is moot in my personal case and I shall bow out and go play with my swords.

 

[Flying Crane]

I think the OP's problem was that he is inexperienced.

possibly true, and yes, inexperience is a big handicap.

Could one not just as easily say "boxing is very effective and only at full blast"? Fill in any art you like.

it's not the same thing. Boxers are both fighting under the SAME RULES. They agree to abide by the rules, they wear gloves that affect how they can attack each other, and they have at it.

However, this is very different from the original post. Nyrotic is primarily a striker. He was horsing around with friends. Some of the friends are grapplers, or at least are instinctive grapplers without formal training. They are both approaching the game, the horse play, with different assumptions. Nyrotic throws a punch that lands, but because these are friends, he pulls his power and doesn't injure them. He is operating under the assumption that his friends will acknowledge and respect that punch, and recognize the fact that they would have been injured if he had not pulled his power back. But because the punch did no actual damage, the friends ignore it, charge in and grapple him down. Grappling techs cannot be ignored, and they are much much easier to execute at less than full power. Grappling has an advantage under horseplay, where nobody wants to really hurt anybody. Grappling techs can be executed to just the level needed to control the opponent without injury. Striking techs don't have this capability. They either injure, or they do not. If they do not, and the other guy chooses to not respect the fact that he just got hit, then it doesn't work.

A comparable situation would be if one boxer always pulled his punches to avoid injury, but the other boxer was landing strikes with full power. Even if the first boxer landed 10 times the strikes, he loses because he pulled back. The other guy who chose to ignore the strikes and then hit back with full power will win. If they are operating under different and unequal rules, it doesn't work.

Under these circumstances, the only choice Nyrotic has if he chooses to engage in such horseplay with friends, is to bloody a few noses and blacken a few eyes until the other guys start to understand what he could do. Maybe then they will respect his side of the game.

This reminds me of an incident that happened when I was a teenager. I had attended a late night youth dance, a friend of mine was horsing around with another guy several years older than us, and who I did not know. I ended up being pulled into the horseplay, the other guy was drunk, and he thought I was starting to push him around. I believe the guy has some Tae Kwon Do training, and at the time I was a green belt in kenpo.

At any rate, it escalated quickly, and he became agressive and beligerent, and started to attack me. I nullified each his attacks, and set him up to really hurt him. But I didn't follow thru on any of them because I wasn't quite certain if he was serious, or if this was still just part of the horseplay. At any rate, I touched his nose with the palm of my hand. Anther time I actually stuck my fingers in and touched the surface of his eyes. Another time I set a tiger claw at his groin and prepared to grab, rip, and tear. Finally I set a tiger claw on his throat and gave a small sqeeze before letting go. Finally the situation de-escalated, we shook hands and went our separate ways. He had no idea what I was setting up on him. Because I chose to not follow thru, he was able to ignore it and keep trying to come in at me.

It was a stupid situation, it could have gotten ugly, and I am glad it ended peacefully. But it serves as a good example of a failure to acknowledge what is happening.

 

[Sukerkin]

Now that's a much better rebuttal than mine FC - excellent expression of some of what I was trying to say :rei:.