Just another WT(CH) thread

**Dr._Tzun_Tzu** · Posted On: 7/26/2005 11:20pm

Originally Posted by locu5

No, you are reading that no one believes a kick to the hips will stop a takedown. Please get these techniques on video against an actual shot. Otherwise we won't believe you. Ever.

I haven't watched it lately, but it seems Royces first attempt in the famous BJJ vs Fung Fu vid shows a kick stopping him and bouncing him back across the room. D'whateverhisnamewas doesn't follow up, and then gets his ass handed to him Royal. But it is a kick stopping a takedown attempt.

I will see If I can get a hold of a camera. Since only a real grappler shoot will do, I may just post a still pic to show the idea.

I want to point out that I was never intending to discuss the merits of the technique, but the issues with excepting challanges. My point was lost in all the mouth masterbation on here.

good post, i aint punchy.

I too have seen the move I mentioned fail many, many, many, many times. I also have never seen it done the way I pulled it off that one time. I've seen people do it wrong, against the upright takedowns for example, or after the takedown is on and they have lost balance, but this is not what I did. This fool didn't like dealing with punches and kicks to thigh and knee so he kept his distance. Then from distance he went for a low tackle, or double leg takedown. It was so easy to put the elbow where I wanted it. If he had not stopped I had also turned to his side, if he had somehow got ahold from that position I would have knee dropped onto his neck and ribs.

My point is, short of me damaging his cerrabellum and vertabra, causing swelling to put pressure on the Brain stem, he was not gona listen to what I was saying. Everyone watching, including his friends said he was toast. If he was not gonna listen, he would not make a good student, and if ws not their to see if he could be a student, he was wasting my time, and my students time.

:new_smile yes I mentioned the BJJ vs Kung Fu vid just to stir you guys up a bit.... :angry4: :new_uklia

I gotta go read those fallacys JohnyC Posted a link too......

**Darting Fingers** · Posted On: 7/26/2005 11:34pm

Fact: Wing Chun (or whatever name it takes) has no comprehensive ground fighting system within its curiculum as per when it was taught years ago and any one that claims it does has sourced at least part of the basis for that system from another art and manipulated it. WC as stated before needs to incorporate elements from other arts, specifically clinch work, takedowns, effective grappling systems, some elements of strikingand some elements of kicking. Ultimately the priciples of WC can be manipulated to fit with all these things they are just not standard as to what people consider WC.
Although that reads like WC lacks all the neccesary elements to a martial art, the base formed by practising "traditional WC" can seemlessly incorporate those elements with great success.

**mpark** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 12:06am

Originally Posted by alittlebird

No no no, you're missing the point. Ridiculous, theoretical 'anti-grappling' doesn't stop takedowns. 'Anti-grappling' is an excuse used by people who refuse to crosstrain/learn grappling because they despereately want to believe their art is 'complete' or doesn't need grappling.

You stop a takedown by training in takedowns with people who are good at them, that is to say, training in a takedown art. Eventually, when you've developed a decent bottom game, and are able to get up regularly after being taken down, the takedown becomes less and less of a 'guaranteed loss' for you, even if your sprawl fails you. Then you start throwing knees from your spralw, and maybe even on the way in, and since you're not so worried about being taken down, and now understand the timing and mechanics of the takedown infinitely better, you start to connect with these. TADA! You've now got a trainable, repeatable defense against a grappler's takedown, AND you are not as good as done if said defense fails. You no longer have to rely on a single 'hail mary' strike, deadly or not, to save your ass.

Imagine I was a boxer and decided I want to learn to defend against chain punches. So I ask a random buddy of mine to throw a bunch of 'wing chun style punches' at me. He's never done wing chun before, but why let that stop me from convincing myself how easy it is to stop a wing chun guy from doing something he trains in all the time. I find some moves that would seem to maim or kill my friend if he attacks with a bunch of arm punches down the middle, though I can never really try them in sparring or with much power because they too deadly. How good do you think my odds of applying my 'anti-wing chun' techniques against a decent wing chun man are?

Awesome post. alittlebird deserves a gold star or something.

**Locu5** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 7:09am

Learn to sprawl with one and two legs. Quit wasting your time.

**Fighting Cephalopod** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 11:11am

Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu

Then from distance he went for a low tackle, or double leg takedown. It was so easy to put the elbow where I wanted it. If he had not stopped I had also turned to his side, if he had somehow got ahold from that position I would have knee dropped onto his neck and ribs.

My point is, short of me damaging his cerrabellum and vertabra, causing swelling to put pressure on the Brain stem, he was not gona listen to what I was saying.

And like I said, he was right not to do so. There is no guarantee that an elbow dropped like that will "damag[e] his cerrabellum[sic] and vertabra[sic]", and we have lots and lots of footage of people dropping an elbow on the back of the head/neck and getting taken down anyway.

The proper thing to do is defend the takedown mechanically (by sprawling) and /then/ drop elbows while he is in a compromised position. If all you do is drop the elbow and depend on that to defend the takedown, most of the time, you are going to wind up on your back with an angry grappler on top of you.

**sanguine** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 12:59pm

Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu

My point is, short of me damaging his cerrabellum and vertabra, causing swelling to put pressure on the Brain stem, he was not gona listen to what I was saying. Everyone watching, including his friends said he was toast. If he was not gonna listen, he would not make a good student, and if ws not their to see if he could be a student, he was wasting my time, and my students time.

Hunh. I'd thought you were suggesting sort of a "one-shot-KO/kill" before, but are you saying that successfully employing the elbow will cause swelling of the brain? If so, that's not the best takedown defense, is it? Brain swelling takes a while to disable someone, certainly longer than it will take the individual to continue to take you down and then do something bad to you on the ground.

I think you've made a reasonable case for being cautious about hard strikes to the base of the skull in a practice setting, but not a good case for it being an effective takedown defense.

Brain injury anecdote: Several years ago in collegiate TKD competition, a competitor took a wicked kick to the head and was knocked out. He then got up, competed for a while, and dropped dead minutes later. [And I can't find a good corroborative article for this online, so take it for what it's worth as an anecdote. It happened mid-90s.]

**dakotajudo** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 1:16pm

Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu

I want to point out that I was never intending to discuss the merits of the technique, but the issues with excepting challanges. My point was lost in all the mouth masterbation on here.

Well, your technique was prefaced with:

My WT has worked fine, but I will give you an example.

and my participation in the mouth masturbation has been to address whether the technique works as you claim.

My point is, short of me damaging his cerrabellum and vertabra, causing swelling to put pressure on the Brain stem, he was not gona listen to what I was saying. Everyone watching, including his friends said he was toast. If he was not gonna listen, he would not make a good student, and if ws not their to see if he could be a student, he was wasting my time, and my students time.

The point that several of us have raised here is that you're not likely to cause the kind of damage you claim - but if you're not gonna listen, don't keep repeating the story, you're just wasting time.

For a more realistic guess as to the kind of damage you might have caused, see http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=19892 . To summarize, you might break one of the spinous processes - which would hurt; certainly make continued fighting difficult - but not so likely to affect the brain stem or cerebellum.

Perhaps you think I'm making this up in my head. I can only say that, while I was working on my Master's degree in biology, I was an anatomy lab instructor. This gave me a chance (actually, required me) to handle human bones, including skull and vertebra, and ulna.

I have some idea how sturdy they are.

Currently, I'm what would be called an 'all but thesis hack' (maybe I should put that in my profile) - I've got the education for a Ph.D., but not finished the research. Long story short, the area I started in is no longer the area I want to finish in. I've been talking with the physiology instructor (I've been his lab instructor) on campus about finishing my degree in exercise physiology, perhaps emphasising a martial arts aspect.

I tell you this not to impress you, but to let you know that I've been thinking about this kind of thing for quite some time. And, as a judo coach, I get to test some of my thoughts (obviously, not this one, directly).

One other thing that, in a small way, informs my opinion on this - I grew up on a farm. Worked a lot of animals; sometimes that involved whacking them with sticks across the back and head. We also butchered - I've hacked, twisted, bent, cut into a lot of spines. Not exactly human, but I'm less inclined to view the human neck as frail, as you seem to view it.

I'm not claiming as much expertise as a cervical specialist, but then, it's not a mystery to me, either.

For what it's worth, I take the time to post my thoughts in this kind of thing because if forces me to, first, actually think about a problem, and second, organize and refine my thinking.

Kinda like how actually fighting makes you refine your technique. Randori is life.

So even if I think you're full of ****, I value the debate.

**dakotajudo** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 1:55pm

Originally Posted by sanguine

Brain injury anecdote: Several years ago in collegiate TKD competition, a competitor took a wicked kick to the head and was knocked out. He then got up, competed for a while, and dropped dead minutes later. [And I can't find a good corroborative article for this online, so take it for what it's worth as an anecdote. It happened mid-90s.]

Pubmed is your friend.

A couple finds:

J Trauma. 1991 Feb;31(2):251-3.

Morbidity and mortality in the martial arts: a warning.

Approximately 1.5 to 2 million Americans participate in the martial arts. Injury anecdotes are reported from 10 years of providing medical coverage at martial arts activities. Included are data from two national Tae Kwon Do tournaments, one adult and one junior level. Previously unreported injuries, including a video-recorded fatality, demonstrate the danger inherent in participation. Of particular concern is the potential for serious neurologic injury. Recommendations are made for reducing the severity and frequency of injuries

Neurology. 2003 Apr 22;60(8):1392-3

Traumatic internal carotid artery dissection associated with taekwondo.

No abstract available.

I'm assuming in the second, internal bleeding, due to a torn carotid, lead to the fatality.

**Jekyll** · Posted On: 7/27/2005 6:17pm

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to dakotajudo again.

**I aint punchy!?** · Posted On: 7/28/2005 1:56am

Originally Posted by Darting Fingers

Fact: Wing Chun (or whatever name it takes) has no comprehensive ground fighting system within its curiculum as per when it was taught years ago and any one that claims it does has sourced at least part of the basis for that system from another art and manipulated it. WC as stated before needs to incorporate elements from other arts, specifically clinch work, takedowns, effective grappling systems, some elements of strikingand some elements of kicking. Ultimately the priciples of WC can be manipulated to fit with all these things they are just not standard as to what people consider WC.
Although that reads like WC lacks all the neccesary elements to a martial art, the base formed by practising "traditional WC" can seemlessly incorporate those elements with great success.

I keep saying this: WC has striking, and stand-up grappling including takedowns (sweeps and throws) but not ground-work. Takedowns are meant to make the person fall badly so they cant get up, break a bone on the way down (e.g. elbow hyperextension and sweep) or can be taken out with strikes when they are down (kick to the head). This is traditional WC, but perhaps not the typical WC/WT/VT stuff that you see around the place which tends to focus on a parrallel stance and chain punching.