224978 Bullies, 3396 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 235
Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Southpaw is offline
    Southpaw's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,907

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 9:42am

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, Wing Chun

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    What JNP said.

    Basically...as a martial art...I define good wing chun as the ability to win a fight against even a partially trained opponent.

    I rarely see good wing chun.
  2. DerAuslander is offline
    DerAuslander's Avatar

    Valiant Monk of Booze & War

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    18,451

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 10:13am

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: BJJ/C-JKD/KAAALIII!!!!!!!

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Southpaw View Post
    What JNP said.

    Basically...as a martial art...I define good wing chun as the ability to win a fight against even a partially trained opponent.

    I rarely see good wing chun.
    I've seen it in full contact on the leitai...occassionally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southpaw View Post
    What JNP said.

    Basically...as a martial art...I define good wing chun as the ability to win a fight against even a partially trained opponent.

    I rarely see good wing chun.
    I've seen it in full contact on the leitai...occassionally.
  3. kalavic is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    65

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 10:24am


     Style: wing chun

    -2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    You are posting like it is 2007....oh.... wait...nevermind.
    I see your point:) In all fairness, I have read a lot of the work on the site done by you on similar questions. I am much obliged. Here's the thing though: everyone always evades answering what wing chun is. Like you said in Southpaw's thread: it's buried in 15 threads, and I'm trying to approach it from another angle to get some productive answers.

    There's plenty that everyone agrees on, that any martial art needs to have the martial part in it, which means aliveness in sparring to keep it real. I hear that, I got that back in 2007, and even before that. That it can't and shouldn't look like it's coming out of a demo or movie, also no news to anyone. But there has to be some kind of identity.

    Let's take yoga as an example. This isn't a martial art, but it can have a great positive influence on your fighting. It's also full of wu. Nobody gives it a hard time though, because nobody makes claims about it as a fighting system. It can be easily defined and graded against itself as good or bad in a way that isn't directly related to fighting ability. Likewise you could have a "good" fighter who has absolutely terrible yoga.

    I think making a similar distinction with wing chun is in order. I don't really consider it a true martial art, rather an art with martial aspects in it. That doesn't mean that you can't have a great martial artist who is a wing chun guy. And a wing chun MARTIAL ART school should teach how to fight.

    I really value my training in wing chun. It has literally saved my ass in some self defense situations. But the thing is, I put in a lot of work beyond what was done in class to make it applicable. I also had some experience in wrestling, karate, boxing and different styles of kung fu, which, although very limited, had a big influence. I'm nothing awesome, but I was able to take what I had learned from my sifus and form it into something cohesive enough to get me at a level to have a clear advantage over your average joe. All of the chunners I respect have had to go through a similar process. I have some sambo, judo, and boxing friends who never even took an interest in self-defense but theirs works "out of the box."

    The way I see it, it has plenty of value, but it needs to be viewed in the right perpective. If you put the fight effectivity goggles on a less than effective martial art, you essentially just erase that martial art. Anyone serious who realizes there are more effective martial arts will avoid it. Sound familiar?
  4. Kovacs is online now
    Kovacs's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kent - UK
    Posts
    1,552

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 12:30pm


     Style: Kettles (MA hiatus).

    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    How does it have value when it needs several types of different arts to supplement it to an effective level? It's begs the question of why bother with it in the first place.
    "Won't fight me in the ring? Don't fight me on the street."
    Paraphrased from Bullshido.

    "You can't judge Martial Arts until you feel the joy of kicking someone in the face and not go to prison for it."
    Mrs Kovacs.
  5. Permalost is offline
    Permalost's Avatar

    pro nonsense self defense

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,555

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 12:46pm

    supporting member
     Style: FMA, dumbek, Indian clubs

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kalavic View Post
    I see your point:) In all fairness, I have read a lot of the work on the site done by you on similar questions. I am much obliged. Here's the thing though: everyone always evades answering what wing chun is. Like you said in Southpaw's thread: it's buried in 15 threads, and I'm trying to approach it from another angle to get some productive answers.

    There's plenty that everyone agrees on, that any martial art needs to have the martial part in it, which means aliveness in sparring to keep it real. I hear that, I got that back in 2007, and even before that. That it can't and shouldn't look like it's coming out of a demo or movie, also no news to anyone. But there has to be some kind of identity.

    Let's take yoga as an example. This isn't a martial art, but it can have a great positive influence on your fighting. It's also full of wu. Nobody gives it a hard time though, because nobody makes claims about it as a fighting system. It can be easily defined and graded against itself as good or bad in a way that isn't directly related to fighting ability. Likewise you could have a "good" fighter who has absolutely terrible yoga.

    I think making a similar distinction with wing chun is in order. I don't really consider it a true martial art, rather an art with martial aspects in it. That doesn't mean that you can't have a great martial artist who is a wing chun guy. And a wing chun MARTIAL ART school should teach how to fight.

    I really value my training in wing chun. It has literally saved my ass in some self defense situations. But the thing is, I put in a lot of work beyond what was done in class to make it applicable. I also had some experience in wrestling, karate, boxing and different styles of kung fu, which, although very limited, had a big influence. I'm nothing awesome, but I was able to take what I had learned from my sifus and form it into something cohesive enough to get me at a level to have a clear advantage over your average joe. All of the chunners I respect have had to go through a similar process. I have some sambo, judo, and boxing friends who never even took an interest in self-defense but theirs works "out of the box."

    The way I see it, it has plenty of value, but it needs to be viewed in the right perpective. If you put the fight effectivity goggles on a less than effective martial art, you essentially just erase that martial art. Anyone serious who realizes there are more effective martial arts will avoid it. Sound familiar?
    Are essays like this symptomatic of good or bad wing chun?
  6. Southpaw is offline
    Southpaw's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,907

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 1:14pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ, Wing Chun

    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kalavic View Post
    The way I see it, it has plenty of value, but it needs to be viewed in the right perpective. If you put the fight effectivity goggles on a less than effective martial art, you essentially just erase that martial art. Anyone serious who realizes there are more effective martial arts will avoid it. Sound familiar?
    I'm not sure I agree with this...and I'm not sure what you mean by "more effective martial arts..." Are you saying that there are more efficient ways to learn to be effective at fighting? If that's your point...then I do agree.

    Look...wing chun is a victim of itself. Like any martial art that isn't regularly tested in a full-contact competitive nature...it's going to be sketchy when you try to use it in real life (if you don't recreate the pressure testing that naturally comes with competition).

    The challenge with Wing Chun is that not very many people can handle and stick to the type of training that is required to make it applicable and functional. This isn't a positive aspect of wing chun BTW. The fact that you need to be inherently tough to train it enough to make it work really limits the 'global' and overall effectiveness of (your average) wing chun (fighter).

    So...yes it's a martial art. Yes it can be useful and effective. Yes if you are a successful wing chun fighter...you probably would have been a bad ass (insert any martial art here) fighter.

    Not sure what my point is...but I am obligated to respond to any wing chun thread per my lifetime commitment to adding logic to wing chun fallacies.
  7. DerAuslander is offline
    DerAuslander's Avatar

    Valiant Monk of Booze & War

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    18,451

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 3:39pm

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: BJJ/C-JKD/KAAALIII!!!!!!!

    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Permalost View Post
    Are essays like this symptomatic of good or bad wing chun?
    Dihydral planes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Permalost View Post
    Are essays like this symptomatic of good or bad wing chun?
    Dihydral planes.
  8. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,976

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 3:47pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kalavic View Post
    I see your point:) In all fairness, I have read a lot of the work on the site done by you on similar questions. I am much obliged. Here's the thing though: everyone always evades answering what wing chun is. Like you said in Southpaw's thread: it's buried in 15 threads, and I'm trying to approach it from another angle to get some productive answers.

    There's plenty that everyone agrees on, that any martial art needs to have the martial part in it, which means aliveness in sparring to keep it real. I hear that, I got that back in 2007, and even before that. That it can't and shouldn't look like it's coming out of a demo or movie, also no news to anyone. But there has to be some kind of identity.

    Let's take yoga as an example. This isn't a martial art, but it can have a great positive influence on your fighting. It's also full of wu. Nobody gives it a hard time though, because nobody makes claims about it as a fighting system. It can be easily defined and graded against itself as good or bad in a way that isn't directly related to fighting ability. Likewise you could have a "good" fighter who has absolutely terrible yoga.

    I think making a similar distinction with wing chun is in order. I don't really consider it a true martial art, rather an art with martial aspects in it. That doesn't mean that you can't have a great martial artist who is a wing chun guy. And a wing chun MARTIAL ART school should teach how to fight.

    I really value my training in wing chun. It has literally saved my ass in some self defense situations. But the thing is, I put in a lot of work beyond what was done in class to make it applicable. I also had some experience in wrestling, karate, boxing and different styles of kung fu, which, although very limited, had a big influence. I'm nothing awesome, but I was able to take what I had learned from my sifus and form it into something cohesive enough to get me at a level to have a clear advantage over your average joe. All of the chunners I respect have had to go through a similar process. I have some sambo, judo, and boxing friends who never even took an interest in self-defense but theirs works "out of the box."

    The way I see it, it has plenty of value, but it needs to be viewed in the right perpective. If you put the fight effectivity goggles on a less than effective martial art, you essentially just erase that martial art. Anyone serious who realizes there are more effective martial arts will avoid it. Sound familiar?
    Did you just pull the "true martial art" trope? Stop it.
  9. Vieux Normand is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,271

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 4:59pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: 血鷲

    5
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kalavic View Post
    It's also full of wu.

    Wuuuuuuuuu are you?

    Wu-wu, wu-wu.


    Thread is now a crime scene.
  10. bobyclumsyninja is offline
    bobyclumsyninja's Avatar

    :)

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    7,057

    Posted On:
    4/29/2013 8:58pm

    supporting member
     Style: Ex-Tiger KF, ex-SanDa

    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Vieux Normand View Post

    Wuuuuuuuuu are you?

    Wu-wu, wu-wu.


    Thread is now a crime scene.
    That song had the only **** allowed on Rock radio for the longest (AFAIK). What a win!
    Quote Originally Posted by kalavic View Post
    The way I see it, it has plenty of value, but it needs to be viewed in the right perpective. If you put the fight effectivity goggles on a less than effective martial art, you essentially just erase that martial art.
    Yes. Consumers that are looking for safety (in this case, through a system to teach them hand-to-hand combat) SHOULD ditch the shitty for the less shitty, or downright-free-of-****-at-all.

    If a door lock doesn't work unless you have three other locks, and those locks alone would match the impact resistance (?!? :) of all four combined...what the flick does anyone need that lock for? Why pay for it? Why even put it on your door if it was free?

    Wouldn't it get in the way? Possibly it could be confusing in an emergency. If used alone it could give a false sense of security. It doesn't seem to add anything, and doesn't even ping a cost-benefit analysis (unless you just like to masturbate to a bunch of superfluous metal on your door, in which case ok).

    If you have to ditch most of it to make it work (and that IS the case with WC/VT/???), why bother?

    We have finite lifespans, so why go for an expensive millionth-best, with all there is to offer?

    Don't ask what's good about it, and instead recognize that there's less right with it, proportionately, than so many other martial arts, that you are chasing the pot with bottom pair and a pathetic kicker (if you'll pardon the poker analogy, on top of the door-lock analogy).
Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.