Non-Wing Chun

Graywalker said:
As can and has been demonstrated, by all other martial arts, in some way or another. If the individual has proven it for themselves, then can they speak with experience. If not, for me personally, I will not learn from them, nor will I respect their opinion concerning non-sport combat.

I believe that all sport combat, is simply sparring, not fighting, so I am bias when it comes to subject.
Click to expand...

So who do you think is better at defending themself? A MMA fighter, or some guy who does a kata with knives?
 
gpseymour said:
You made a sidelong comment on what I think is the key part of my post. I've never quite understood why you draw a black-and-white difference between competition and sparring.
Click to expand...
That's true. I see a clear, black and white difference between competition and sparring. They are not the same thing. One is training and the other is not training. Honestly, and I'm being completely serious, I do not understand how this is controversial or confusing in any way. To me, it's like saying fish are not frogs, even though they both like water.
I've never competed in MA, but I've competed in plenty of other things. A pick-up game of soccer has all the bits of a formal soccer game. In pick-up games, I've actually played against folks who were at a skill level I'd never have run into in competition (I wasn't good enough to get to that level). To me, they're the same in most ways. Take it to a game against a close rival team and things change. Same for a playoff game. But most formal matches weren't distinctly different from the scrimmages and pick-up games.

How does that change with MA?
Click to expand...
What are we actually talking about here? You're seem to think it's a given that sparring is equivalent to even a pick up game of soccer. I don't think that's true, though it's definitely not the same as playing in a league. I get that you think they're the same, but that's because you have a vested interest in validating sparring as fighting.

But once again, that really misses the entire point. Why are we picking nits over this, when the outcome so clearly makes my point? To borrow my words from another thread (where all of this is far more on topic). We have had debates/arguments/discussions ad nauseum about the subtle differences between competing and not competing make on the overall learning and performance of the people who train in a style. You're so close to the wall, you can't see the shape of the room.

How reliably can someone expect to apply their fighting skills within the context of their style and without? I believe if you took 400 people in a study where their practical skills are evaluated at regular intervals, the results would speak for themselves, and it wouldn't even be close. To be clear, I'm talking about evaluating relative performance within the specific trained context of the art, and also tested outside of the context of the art.

So, 400 people, all about the same age, all with average fitness levels and health, randomly assigned to one of the following four groups:
  • Group 1: 100 trained in MMA (or BJJ, or Judo, etc).
  • Group 2: 100 in that same style, but without competition.
  • Group 3: 100 who trained in a performance based fitness program (crossfit, parkour, etc), and
  • Group 4: 100 who don't train as a control group.
In each of the groups, to eliminate as many variables as possible, they all start from scratch with no previous martial arts experience, and they train only as a group (i.e., no other training partners) under a well qualified instructor.

After a year, I think Groups 1 and 3 would be most capable of defending themselves in a fight and would perform pretty similarly. Group 2 would, I believe, be no more capable of fighting than Group 4, and in a fight would probably be indistinguishable.

After 3 years, I think Group 1 pulls clearly ahead of Group 3. In a fight, groups 2 and 4 would still be indistinguishable (as far as fighting skill). It's possible that group 2 fights better than group 4, but I think performance will be very close between the two groups, both far below groups 1 and 3.

After 5 years, group 1 would begin to display visible expertise in the area. Group 3 would be very fit, but fighting ability would have plateaued. I would expect the only question at 5 years to be whether Group 2 fights better than Group 4. Maybe after 5 years, they would, more likely if the training is excellent (e.g., includes sparring). But I don't see group 2 even now outfighting the fitness group (group 3), and well below the competitive group. Their lack of actual fighting experience will not (I believe) be enough for them to overcome the athleticism of the fitness group.

And, as I said before, I think we all know that this is true.
 
Hanzou said:
I didn't say who would survive, I said who would do better.

And I'm not talking about movie Ninjas, I'm talking about these Ninjas;

Click to expand...
if you loose you loose, nether does better

if its thise specific ninjas then they both win, so again a draw
 
Highlander said:
@Steve are you saying that the only way to get good at fighting is to actually fight? That training/sparring in class doesn't really help?
Click to expand...
Oh, those are two separate things, and not mutually exclusive. Yes, the only way to get good at fighting (or anything) is to fight. Specially, the only way to get REALLY good at anything is to accumulate enough experience to become an expert.

And, yes, training and sparring do really help. Good training can make the transition to application a lot faster, and people who train a little, apply a lot, train a little more, etc. are generally going to progress faster than without training.
 
jobo said:
if you loose you loose, nether does better

if its thise specific ninjas then they both win, so again a draw
Click to expand...

Not really. Say you're protecting your family, and you doing better gives them enough time to escape, even though you die?

What if a woman is attacked, and stabbed multiple times. However before she dies she's able to choke her attacker to death, sparing future victims from her fate?

As a self defense advocate, it's rather amusing to see you use the term "win or lose" when discussing self defense. Sometimes positive outcomes still result with the defender being killed.
 
Steve said:
Oh, those are two separate things, and not mutually exclusive. Yes, the only way to get good at fighting (or anything) is to fight. Specially, the only way to get REALLY good at anything is to accumulate enough experience to become an expert.

And, yes, training and sparring do really help. Good training can make the transition to application a lot faster, and people who train a little, apply a lot, train a little more, etc. are generally going to progress faster than without training.
Click to expand...
if someone never fights, how would you kbow how good they were at fighting ?
 
Hanzou said:
Not really. Say you're protecting your family, and you doing better gives them enough time to escape, even though you die?

What if a woman is attacked, and stabbed multiple times. However before she dies she's able to choke her attacker to death, sparing future victims from her fate?

As a self defense advocate, it's rather amusing to see you use the term "win or lose" when discussing self defense. Sometimes positive outcomes still result with the defender being killed.
Click to expand...
if your dead youve definelty lost
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Maxims... lets try again

Previous Thread

Hit with the Body

Next Thread

Similar threads

D
Movement towards Wing Chun in competition???
Replies
11
Views
3K
KamonGuy2
K
dosk3n
What do you call yourself.
Replies
18
Views
2K
matsu
M
S
Wing Chun Kickers
2 3
Replies
53
Views
5K
Si-Je
Si-Je
Yoshiyahu
Iron Rings & Wing Chun
Replies
3
Views
3K
Yoshiyahu
Yoshiyahu
C
Wing Chun Guiding Principle
Replies
16
Views
2K
Callen
C

Latest Discussions

Back
Top