Getting the Angle

[LFJ]

---Why is it baffling that when everyone says "this won't work" and yet Juany and I know it will....that we continue to try and point out how and why it will work?

Because no one believes you or buys your explanations,
but you just keep expecting people to take your word for it.

At several points in this conversation you've had the opportunity to agree to disagree and move on.

---And I tried. And each time LJF simply reasserted the points I had already answered and had people agreeing with him. Why are you not directing this same speech to LFJ? More than once in this thread I tried to just drop it, and he kept it going.

Why not just drop it now, since no one is sold on your technique?

 

[KPM]

Because no one believes you or buys your explanations,
but you just keep expecting people to take your word for it.

----Isn't that what happens with practically every PB clip? You end up telling everyone that we don't understand what is happening because we don't train WSLVT. Therefore we need to just take your word for it? Isn't that what has happened with every clip that has appeared showing WSL teaching applications from the forms? You end up saying "WSLVT doesn't teach applications" and expect everyone to just take your word for it, despite what is apparent in videos of WSL teaching? Isn't that what happened when I showed multiple pics of WSLVT people standing in a Tan Da position? You said "WSLVT doesn't do Tan Da!", and expected everyone to just take your word for it?

Why not just drop it now, since no one is sold on your technique?

---Sure. I'm willing to drop it if you are. I've said that multiple times on this thread already. But you did your best to keep the argument going.

 

[LFJ]

----Isn't that what happens with practically every PB clip? You end up telling everyone that we don't understand what is happening because we don't train WSLVT. Therefore we need to just take your word for it? Isn't that what has happened with every clip that has appeared showing WSL teaching applications from the forms? You end up saying "WSLVT doesn't teach applications" and expect everyone to just take your word for it, despite what is apparent in videos of WSL teaching? Isn't that what happened when I showed multiple pics of WSLVT people standing in a Tan Da position? You said "WSLVT doesn't do Tan Da!", and expected everyone to just take your word for it?

No. Entirely different.

We're looking at a straightforward technique application from standard TWC here (an application-based style), that anyone can see and analyze for themselves. There are no unknowns.

Then, you can watch a clip of what you think is an application but which is not, or look at a still photo of a position and try to make guesses as to what it might be, but still be wrong.

These are not comparable.

 

[KPM]

No. Entirely different.

We're looking at a straightforward technique application from standard TWC here (an application-based style), that anyone can see and analyze for themselves. There are no unknowns.

Then, you can watch a clip of what you think is an application but which is not, or look at a still photo of a position and try to make guesses as to what it might be, but still be wrong.

These are not comparable.

And....you expect us to take your word for that??

 

[LFJ]

And....you expect us to take your word for that??

No. I honestly don't care.

You are the one chasing me around with pictures you think you can learn the system from.

I just laugh at you.

 

[Juany118]

So when we accept this Mazza guy can actually pull off what he says he can. Then accept that the liver punch will drop the guy and also accept that the person we are fighting won't be able to take advantage of a gift wrapped shot to my head.

The technique all makes perfect sense.

I think you again are missing the point. The video is not about "this is how you fight" it's about "if you want to get to this particular target this a particular way to get there." No more and no less. I think people are placing more meaning on that single thing than was intended. His seminars run an entire day and cover lots of techniques and tactical applications, he just only allows a couple minutes of video to be posted so people actually pay for the seminar and show up instead of just waiting for the video to hit.

So if we break the video down we have him showing one way to get to the flank and take someone's balance and establish control (which I think we all agree is a good idea). What you do from there CAN be what he does, or it can be to take the back like @Nobody Important says, or transition to an lock/takedown like I would do, or you could just nail the guy in the head, OR you could go for head control... etc etc etc. Also, it's all about "if you get there" if you don't you do something else. Just about every seminar I have gone to, from Sifu Keith to Guro Dan, works this way.

Somebody tried to make this about a "this is how you fight" video which it isn't and I think a bunch hopped on that train.

 

[LFJ]

The video is not about "this is how you fight" it's about "if you want to get to this particular target this a particular way to get there."...
...Somebody tried to make this about a "this is how you fight" video which it isn't and I think a bunch hopped on that train.

Wanting to get to a particular target and the particular way you get there is how you fight.

You are saying the same thing. Unless this is just playing and has no relation to how you fight with TWC.

But, the question was why you would want to get there (risky low target on the inside) when you already have superior, relatively safe outside flank position from entry as shown. Just doesn't make sense to want to go there.

Are you saying to yourself "I wanna hit low inside" before engaging, then setting it up by going to the outside first, then pulling the guy open to get to the inside? That's a lot of choreography work.

But then, you say this is not "how you fight". So, maybe it is choreography just for fun? I don't know. What's the point? Sounds like even more of a waste of time now.

 

[drop bear]

I think you again are missing the point. The video is not about "this is how you fight" it's about "if you want to get to this particular target this a particular way to get there." No more and no less. I think people are placing more meaning on that single thing than was intended. His seminars run an entire day and cover lots of techniques and tactical applications, he just only allows a couple minutes of video to be posted so people actually pay for the seminar and show up instead of just waiting for the video to hit.

So if we break the video down we have him showing one way to get to the flank and take someone's balance and establish control (which I think we all agree is a good idea). What you do from there CAN be what he does, or it can be to take the back like @Nobody Important says, or transition to an lock/takedown like I would do, or you could just nail the guy in the head, OR you could go for head control... etc etc etc. Also, it's all about "if you get there" if you don't you do something else. Just about every seminar I have gone to, from Sifu Keith to Guro Dan, works this way.

Somebody tried to make this about a "this is how you fight" video which it isn't and I think a bunch hopped on that train.

What greater meaning that that sequence is a really risky way to hit that target do you think was placed on that video?