Wing Chun Boxing

[KPM]

I have done so many times, in fact, mostly addressing you personally.
You always seem to forget.

And that always seems to be your answer rather than actually contributing to the discussion at hand. If you just want to argue and not contribute, then go elsewhere.

I'll note that nearly an entire day went by and you posted several times. But you still avoided explaining the "long range game" that you see WSLVT having, nor have you attempted to provide any video showing same.

This is a current discussion. You can't say..."oh I explained that all before, everyone should remember." In a current discussion you contribute to the discussion by explaining your viewpoint. Then people can talk about it. Again, if you are only interesting in arguing and not contributing to the discussion, then please go elsewhere.

 

[KPM]

From my current understanding, the "long range game" in boxing works something like this. Its about being able to control distance and dictate where the fight occurs. That means being able to move in when you see an advantage in in-fighting, and it means being able to stay just at the edge of contact range when you don't want to engage in in-fighting. In a nutshell....it is being able to conduct the fight at arm's reach and to choose NOT to be engaged at close-range. This means in addition to having short, tight and powerful punches on the inside, the fighter also has longer more extended punches that can come from various unpredictable angles at a longer distance. This also means having the ability to bait and lure the opponent into making mistakes, leaving openings, or over-reaching when you are at a longer range. It means having good footwork that will let you control distance and adjust angles quickly, using angles that make it harder for the opponent to land solid punches....in other words, being evasive and hard to hit. Good footwork is also required to move in and out at will....moving in to tag the opponent, and back out again before he can respond well.

So bottom-line.....having an "long range game" in boxing means the boxer can choose to conduct the entire fight at that range and prevent his opponent from bringing him into "clinch range" or "chi sau range".


LB shows it working here:

Ok LFJ. Your turn! And video showing your version of the "long range game" would be very helpful!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not really. What you are taught is never the entire system. You just get enough toolset to find out for yourself.

If someone is not shown part of the system, it isn't their fault they don't know it's in there.

 

[drop bear]

If someone is not shown part of the system, it isn't their fault they don't know it's in there.

Yeah. I am not sure I like the connotations of that and where it leads though. And I admit I am petty sceptical where terms like the complete method and hidden systems are used.

It alludes to some sort of secret that only gives a few select martial artists this edge.

And without a whole heap of supporting evidence becomes very scammy.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. I am not sure I like the connotations of that and where it leads though. And I admit I am petty sceptical where terms like the complete method and hidden systems are used.

It alludes to some sort of secret that only gives a few select martial artists this edge.

And without a whole heap of supporting evidence becomes very scammy.

I'm not sure what you're referring to in that. I'm not saying people shouldn't be shown the whole system, or anything about secret stuff. You popped in on a side-thread where I commented that a person's view of what a style is, is partly determined by what they are taught. If someone isn't taught an entire area of an art, it's not their fault they don't understand that part of the art.

So, what are you arguing against?

 

[drop bear]

I'm not sure what you're referring to in that. I'm not saying people shouldn't be shown the whole system, or anything about secret stuff. You popped in on a side-thread where I commented that a person's view of what a style is, is partly determined by what they are taught. If someone isn't taught an entire area of an art, it's not their fault they don't understand that part of the art.

So, what are you arguing against?

This discussion about whole systems when applied to kung fu is another way of waging the never ending linage war.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This discussion about whole systems when applied to kung fu is another way of waging the never ending linage war.

Except that I never said anyone didn't get the whole system. If you have a problem with that claim, take it up with someone who claimed it.

 

[Flying Crane]

Good article here:

Why Western Boxing is a form of Self-Defence and better than most others. - Rackemann Wing Chun

Honestly, I am not impressed by the article. Sure, boxing is a worthy method, and anyone who is interested in it ought to go ahead and train.

But the author strikes me as someone who doesn't know much about many other systems, and yet wants to put boxing on a pedestal, above other systems.

I'm just not impressed with what he has to say.

 

[LFJ]

Actually, let me correct myself. My main point was that what a student is taught, is properly the entire system to them. If they are not taught part of it, it's not their lack of understanding that created a gap.

I never blamed the student. You only get what you get.

 

[LFJ]

IMO Wing Chun only makes sense as an exclusively clinch-range art. Sure, you can adapt some Chun principles to boxing range, but I don't think you can call it Wing Chun if 90% of the art falls apart and stops making any sense when at that range.

WC should not fall apart and stop making sense at that range!

An exclusively clinch-range art doesn't make sense if you don't know how to safely get there.

What percentage of BJJ is on the ground? But it has standup strategy and tactics to survive at every range from outside into clinch and down to the ground.

It's all part of the overall fighting strategy, even though the preferred range/position is on the ground.

It would be stupid not to consider all the standup ranges that commonly happen in a fight.

 

[LFJ]

It is not completely missing but it is not as comprehensive as it should be. Think BJJ and striking.

It is completely missing if they don't have a WC answer and must look elsewhere for basic things like what to do when you aren't attached to someone's arms.

BJJ has BJJ strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to the ground and finish.

VT has VT strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to close-range and finish.

Thinking you're just going to teleport to your preferred position and not have to worry about ranges in between is fantasy.

 

[LFJ]

And that always seems to be your answer rather than actually contributing to the discussion at hand. If you just want to argue and not contribute, then go elsewhere.

I'll note that nearly an entire day went by and you posted several times. But you still avoided explaining the "long range game" that you see WSLVT having, nor have you attempted to provide any video showing same.

This is a current discussion. You can't say..."oh I explained that all before, everyone should remember." In a current discussion you contribute to the discussion by explaining your viewpoint. Then people can talk about it. Again, if you are only interesting in arguing and not contributing to the discussion, then please go elsewhere.

Blah, blah, blah...

I linked you to a long and detailed post already explaining it.

How 'bout you not just read my first sentence and have a knee-jerk emotional reaction, and actually follow the provided link...?

 

[KPM]

I
BJJ has BJJ strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to the ground and finish.

VT has VT strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to close-range and finish.
.

Having a strategy for moving from long range into your systems desirable close-range is NOT the same thing as having a "long range game" as I have said several times now. BJJ is a good example. BJJ has methods for surviving until they can get the takedown and do their thing. But that is not the same thing as having a "long range game." So what do many BJJ guys do? They learn to box or kickbox! If BJJ had a "long range game" then they would have the ability to conduct the entire fight from long range. If Wing Chun had a "long range game", we would be able to conduct the entire fight from long range. I explained that pretty well in my last post. I made the effort to actually explain what I'm talking about in some detail and contribute to this discussion. And your response was to simply ignore my points and say "blah, blah, blah."

Some Wing Chun guys think they can use their techniques on the ground. But would you say that Wing Chun has a "ground game"? Does boxing have a "ground game"? I'd say "no" to both! Just like I would say that Wing Chun and BJJ both have no "long range game."

And let me repost something else you ignored:

This is a current discussion. You can't say..."oh I explained that all before, everyone should remember." In a current discussion you contribute to the discussion by explaining your viewpoint. Then people can talk about it. Again, if you are only interesting in arguing and not contributing to the discussion, then please go elsewhere.

 

[drop bear]

It is completely missing if they don't have a WC answer and must look elsewhere for basic things like what to do when you aren't attached to someone's arms.

BJJ has BJJ strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to the ground and finish.

VT has VT strategy for all ranges of standup, though the goal is to get to close-range and finish.

Thinking you're just going to teleport to your preferred position and not have to worry about ranges in between is fantasy.

Ok lets suggest it is completely missing. Looking at range fighting ideas from boxing will give them pretty much the best possible set of tactics to adress that issue.

So it would be more of a reason to collaborate with boxers. Not less of one.

 

[LFJ]

Having a strategy for moving from long range into your systems desirable close-range is NOT the same thing as having a "long range game" as I have said several times now.

Never said it was. It all fits together. Overall fight strategy.

Everything you said here below can be done with VT strategy and tactics, with exception of extended punches we don't want to throw and potentially have expose us, unless necessary.

This says much of the same thing I already outlined in my post you refuse to look at.
The difference is in the specifics.

Its about being able to control distance and dictate where the fight occurs. That means being able to move in when you see an advantage in in-fighting, and it means being able to stay just at the edge of contact range when you don't want to engage in in-fighting. In a nutshell....it is being able to conduct the fight at arm's reach and to choose NOT to be engaged at close-range. This means in addition to having short, tight and powerful punches on the inside, the fighter also has longer more extended punches that can come from various unpredictable angles at a longer distance. This also means having the ability to bait and lure the opponent into making mistakes, leaving openings, or over-reaching when you are at a longer range. It means having good footwork that will let you control distance and adjust angles quickly, using angles that make it harder for the opponent to land solid punches....in other words, being evasive and hard to hit. Good footwork is also required to move in and out at will....moving in to tag the opponent, and back out again before he can respond well.

This is essential, because while the preferred VT method might be to get in and finish, if the person I'm facing is more skilled than me at close-range, staying there when it's not working is going to get me hurt.

VT has methods of recovering to the outside when necessary. It has methods of controlling distance at long range, keeping the opponent at bay, using evasive footwork, then baiting and drawing them into overextension and errors that we can capitalize on. We can stay out and finish with kicks at long-range, too, or use that to open them up for finishing punches. All VT. No need to resort to WB.

Question:

What the heck does a WC fighter do when they are outclassed at close-range and have no long-range plan, or plan B whatsoever??

If they haven't cross-trained they just get knocked out?

Great system! Very intelligent...

And let me repost something else you ignored:

This is a current discussion. You can't say..."oh I explained that all before, everyone should remember." In a current discussion you contribute to the discussion by explaining your viewpoint. Then people can talk about it. Again, if you are only interesting in arguing and not contributing to the discussion, then please go elsewhere.

I answered. You refused to follow the link for some reason.

You posted links to an article in this thread. Why don't you copy the whole thing here, too?

Also, this is not KPMartialtalk.com. Don't tell me where and what I can post.

If you don't like it, you need not talk to me.

 

[LFJ]

Ok lets suggest it is completely missing. Looking at range fighting ideas from boxing will give them pretty much the best possible set of tactics to adress that issue.

So it would be more of a reason to collaborate with boxers. Not less of one.

Probably so! I was not saying there is anything wrong with drawing from Western Boxing, if they can make it work. It's definitely better than non-functional "Classical WC".

I'm just saying YMVT already has VT ideas at different ranges that tie into its overall strategy. No need to look elsewhere or result to other methods for basic standup fighting ideas, unless something so fundamental and crucial is severely lacking from the system as one has learned it.

 

[drop bear]

Probably so! I was not saying there is anything wrong with drawing from Western Boxing, if they can make it work. It's definitely better than non-functional "Classical WC".

I'm just saying YMVT already has VT ideas at different ranges that tie into its overall strategy. No need to look elsewhere or result to other methods for basic standup fighting ideas, unless something so fundamental and crucial is severely lacking from the system as one has learned it.

The YMVT ideas may not suit the wing chun guys goals as readily as boxing. In which case looking elsewhere is the better option in this case. YMVT may even have crucial details missing that has been picked up by someone else.

 

[LFJ]

The YMVT ideas may not suit the wing chun guys goals as readily as boxing. In which case looking elsewhere is the better option in this case. YMVT may even have crucial details missing that has been picked up by someone else.

VT ideas suit VT goals. Boxing ideas are often contradictory, so looking there is not a good option.

The reason "Wing Chun Boxing" might work, is because it's actually just boxing...

Everything that was WC– the biomechanical engine, non-existent fighting strategy– has been replaced or gap-filled with WB or changed to mimic WB methods, as with the hand techniques found working in WB in a WB way which has been adopted.

In the end, it's just WB with the WC name.

 

[drop bear]

VT ideas suit VT goals. Boxing ideas are often contradictory, so looking there is not a good option.

The reason "Wing Chun Boxing" might work, is because it's actually just boxing...

Everything that was WC– the biomechanical engine, non-existent fighting strategy– has been replaced or gap-filled with WB or changed to mimic WB methods, as with the hand techniques found working in WB in a WB way which has been adopted.

In the end, it's just WB with the WC name.

Well obviously you would choose the parts of boxing that suits the parts if chun.

You dont have to do all of either system.

Chun people are not all idiots. They should be able to figure out what they are trying to achieve.

I dont think it matters if what they come up with was the origional intention of the guy who created the system or not.

Just come up with something good.

 

[LFJ]

Well obviously you would choose the parts of boxing that suits the parts if chun.

You dont have to do all of either system.

VT is designed to work in a way that WB does not.

It also doesn't have extra parts you can just throw out and still expect it to work. It doesn't have many parts to begin with.

The strategy and tactics form a highly integrated approach to fighting. If some elements are missing it no longer works.

If gap-filled, it also generally doesn't go well, unless the gap is the entire fighting strategy and method that gets transplanted, as with "Wing Chun Boxing".

I dont think it matters if what they come up with was the origional intention of the guy who created the system or not.

Just come up with something good.

Well, if you're starting from what you acknowledge is a non-functional system,
I guess anything you add to it that has been demonstrated to work would do it good.