222421 Bullies, 4224 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 151 to 160 of 229
Page 16 of 23 FirstFirst ... 61213141516 17181920 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. I aint punchy!? is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    686

    Posted On:
    8/28/2005 7:13am


     Style: Arnis, WC, Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu
    Well I am not argueing against it entirely. The Concept from WT view point is just that begineers should start only with strikes and work their way up. Hell, I haven't even been taught the Wooden dummy or Biu Tze forms yet....but I know plenty of applications from them for fist fighting.

    If someone punches my face, and I go straight to bong, how do I know I could not have just wedged them away with a better punch to begin with? That is the point.

    I Know those moves you mention. I think alot of time the attacker is allready to deep on you, across the critical distance line. Givingn up your forward hand (Man sau) and dropping it into bong then makes sense, as the Wu then comes forward as a strike. If your are really beat then both bong and Wu can come out for double coverage (or Gaun sau doubled to the side). I am not argueing against these moves in Wing et al. completely. Just that in WT they are not generally the first move you would go for, more of a secondary or tertiary save your ass defense.

    Also, Ting once said that the bong and tan alone did everything for the advanced Practioner. I am sure he also ment the moves done as deflection defense from an attack shape like jum or pak. His point was the you work up to a point where tan and bong can do so much, you need little else.

    But to get there you must learn to use it in all its variations, and the critical one is to learn to deform when over powered, and to strke when the way is free. Just learning alot of blocks is limited by the reaction time equation (Hicks Law).
    :XXcat:
    I find my self agreeing with some of what you have posted here. I mainly only do 4 blocks in sparring: bong sau, tan sau, puk sau and jut sau. Also, if someone strikes and you can out-punch-them by striking to the centreline, then do it! This is a very good idea if the opportunity presents itself. E.g. someone swings a haymaker then hit with a fast straight punch. This makes sense. However, doing this against someone who can throw a nice punch, and has an eye for the range, will be very hard. Still a good principle, and probably one that most people do without thinking about it.

    The danger is that it is only demonstrated when someone is really outside of legitimate striking range. Any MA demonstrations that involve an 'attacker' who punches who it is out of range to strike the 'defender' should be automatically labelled as BS, and all persons with ripe fruit in the audience should be mandated by law to let loose said groceries upon the performers. Out-punching someone is very hard to do against a non-newb during sparring. I'd hate to try against a boxer.
    Last edited by I aint punchy!?; 8/28/2005 7:21am at .
  2. Dr._Tzun_Tzu is offline
    Dr._Tzun_Tzu's Avatar

    It's pretty beat up, but it is a complete copy....

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,528

    Posted On:
    8/28/2005 7:28am

    supporting member
     Style: EBMAS WT/ Latosa Concepts

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by I aint punchy!?
    Heh this indicates a difference in fighting style. You are suggesting a style of fighting that involves constant attacks (e.g. chain punching) with most of the weight on the back foot? You should know that other styles of WC have training drills that basically involve someone doing chain punches at them at realistic speed and power, and they have to lock up that person and throw or strike them several times. It is surprisingly easy to do after some practice. Thats not to say what you are describing wont be effective in a RBSD setting - it may well be far superior to what you might face on the str33t... who's to say? All I'm saying is that that approach to fighting is a training drill in other styles.
    Very nice, and so two good __g __n people will cancel each other out while anyone with and an open gate will fall down to repeated strikes. This is one point why __g __n people don't like to spar on Video, it gives away secrets, levels the field. Rapid chain punches doesn't surprize as many people as it did in 1970.

    Chain punches is for beginners. Works good against simple muggers and such. The long term goal is to "win with a single blow."

    [QUOTE=I aint punchy!?] Having all of your weight on the backfoot makes you very prone to being pushed or thrown, and to attacks to the front knee (because it is straightened).{/QUOTE]

    Shouldn't be straightened. I have a different experience with this foot work. I can elaborate later its 5:30 AM here and I have been up all night!

    Quote Originally Posted by I aint punchy!?
    Striking power is limited because vertical punches can get lots more power by sinking onto the knee during the strike (perhaps during a step). A good punch can be delivered from a more balanced stance. Lifting the foreleg is easier though, and this is probably why I imagine WT schools do this, because it might make chi-gerk easier. Another issue I have with having 100% weight on the back leg is that it makes for bad footwork... this is why so many WT schools have a weird shuffling footwork that is too slow and easy to read.
    Not to slow when the other guy is running away backwards!!! In almost all my sparring events, the first few exchanges involved the persn running away backwards. We only move forward, taking space, while they expect to move in and out, and for us to also move in and out. As you said, practiced sparring folks don't suffer this to long.

    Kicks to knees and such help avoid throws. The damage to front knee comes when any weight is left there and it can not escape. Muy Thai does the same thing. Royce also creeps in the same way. You can put weight onto front with chasing steps or when safe to switch legs. The posture pull exercise is also a beginner exercise. If you throw me then you generally have to put weight forward to do it, while I have a free leg to kick with. In sparring I avoid it as the danger to friends knees isn't worth the risk. WT still also has secondary and tertiary counters to throws, plus going with it into ground fighting.

    I think alot of WT is stuck in the beginner stage, never getting to the higher forms, and thus never getting some of the forward stance footwork components. True enough.

    Thats why in EBMAS we do Latosa Escrima to the outside gates as well, with begineers. but thats a different thread entirely.... :5nuclear:
    Last edited by Dr._Tzun_Tzu; 8/28/2005 7:31am at .
  3. JFS USA is offline

    Converter of Virgins

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland Area
    Posts
    3,837

    Posted On:
    8/28/2005 9:33am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: H'ung Ga & SPM

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu
    Hey Guys, I am writing up a review of "Roots of Wing Tsun", Leung Ting and "Complete Wing Chun", by Chu, Ritchie and Wu, for readers to compare. Since these cover WT and WC mostly, is there a good VT reference book out there the Ving Tsun people could recomend.
    Chu Sau Lei (Robert Chu) is the "real deal" ... do you know what other TCMA system he has in his background ... his WC sits upon it. John
  4. pox is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    240

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 5:23am


     Style: Kenpo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by JFS USA
    If you want to take that approach then back it down a few levels. A "system" as such does not emerge fully developed. We go from the simple to the complex and there are some fairly decent "rules" governing the level of sophistication a system might experience.
    Hi John
    I think the best analogy I could make for the development of different styles would be to compare it with the development of musical genres. There's twelve notes in western music, but a bewildering array of categories exist, each with their own distinct rules. Even limiting ourselves to popular music, the different genres that exist - such as rock, soul, pop, metal, funk, hip hop etc. have all evolved from existing forms and have attained a distinct sound through specialisation or a synthesis of existing approaches. And to continue the analogy, any given musical style tends to have its own offshoots as the evolutionary process continues on.


    Quote Originally Posted by JFS USA
    From this perspective you might as well shitcan the whole of "Sets" ... a Set is a formal, agreed upon (to whatever measure is questionable), codified way of presenting the bio-mechanics inherent in a specific system.
    just to clarify - are you saying that sets should be done away with?
  5. Bil Gee is offline
    Bil Gee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    244

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 10:28am


     Style: Wing Chun

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by pox
    Hi John
    I think the best analogy I could make for the development of different styles would be to compare it with the development of musical genres. There's twelve notes in western music, but a bewildering array of categories exist, each with their own distinct rules. Even limiting ourselves to popular music, the different genres that exist - such as rock, soul, pop, metal, funk, hip hop etc. have all evolved from existing forms and have attained a distinct sound through specialisation or a synthesis of existing approaches. And to continue the analogy, any given musical style tends to have its own offshoots as the evolutionary process continues on.
    That analogy makes more sense to me than anything else I've come across to explain the evolution of styles.

    It's also worth considering that different styles developed not so much as specific solution to a problem, but more as a reflection of all the beliefs values and goals of the sub-group responsible for developing them.
    Last edited by Bil Gee; 8/29/2005 10:35am at .
  6. Lefty is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    646

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 8:08pm


     Style: FMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Hey Tzu,

    As an EBMAS student I'm surprised you are so loyal to Leung Ting after the split of Emin Boztepe from the WT organisation. However, I hear Keith Kernspecht was the major influence there, and maybe the split wasnt so bad (and more to do with competing market share). Just from looking at Emin's website he advocates a lot of hours of hard training, and is very physically conditioned, which to me seems quite different from LTs yin style approach of relaxation and not using power.

    My advice should you decide to do a book review is to be careful that you are expressing your own views and not just regurgitating entrenched LT/WT dogma to denigrate the traditional WC (Cheung) view. Your review could be read as one-sided lineage bashing and that would reflect poorly.
    Last edited by Lefty; 8/29/2005 8:22pm at .
  7. Dr._Tzun_Tzu is offline
    Dr._Tzun_Tzu's Avatar

    It's pretty beat up, but it is a complete copy....

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,528

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 8:41pm

    supporting member
     Style: EBMAS WT/ Latosa Concepts

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ya, I am an EBMAS Instructor. I have no problem with Leung Ting or even with K. Kernspecht. Their Martial Arts are solid. The Issue was between Si-fu Emin and Si-Gung Kernspecht. Since Si-Fu Emin was my Personal Si-fu, I stay with him, naturally, as did a large part of the students. Ting choose to go with Kernspecht.

    It changes nothing about WT, its theorys, and practice. It also changes nothing about the research I did for the last 15 years in Martial Arts. The facts don't change just because the corprate structure gets a new leader. Si-Fu Emin did immidately restructure the entire program, which he had been prevented from doing before, and it is Much, Much better know.

    Enough of that, I am off topic.

    I have offered many theorys and objective Hypothesis, not all of which are Ting theorys. I do defend alot of Leung Ting stuff strictly on principle, some one on here has too.

    My article review will give each sides origin story. Tings book outlines much collected research (and you will be surprized what he says!). Roots of WT covers Yip man, Hong Kong, Weng Chun, Kok Bo Chuen (snake) Wing Chun, Yeun Chai Wan, Yuen Kay Shan, Ng Chung So Style, Fung Chun side positioning style, Pang Nam Style, Leung Lam Style, Li Hip Chi Style, Po-Fa Style, Cheung Bo Style, Fung Siu Ching Weng Chun, Shan Dai Shu, Fat-Cheung, Wing Choon Style in Nam Yeung, and Ban Chun Wing Choon Style in Malaysia. It is 402 pages (8x11 inch), including photo sets of forms from many versions.

    The Complete Wing Chun book highlites Yip Man, Yeun Kay-San, Gu Lao, Nanyang, Pan Nam, Pao Fa Lien, Hung Suen, Jee Shim, and 6 other Wing Chun styles. Only 144 pages(5x9 inch)

    Then we can cross references and the sim. or diff. between them. It will take a little time :happy3:
    Last edited by Dr._Tzun_Tzu; 8/29/2005 11:45pm at . Reason: spelling
  8. Dr._Tzun_Tzu is offline
    Dr._Tzun_Tzu's Avatar

    It's pretty beat up, but it is a complete copy....

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,528

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 8:59pm

    supporting member
     Style: EBMAS WT/ Latosa Concepts

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by I aint punchy!?

    The danger is that it is only demonstrated when someone is really outside of legitimate striking range. Any MA demonstrations that involve an 'attacker' who punches who it is out of range to strike the 'defender' should be automatically labelled as BS, ......
    I agree with the demo flaw. It is just a demo.

    I agree with your post. I wanted to isolate this one point. Wing Chun in its origin is not ment for squared off, "you ready, ok, I am too, lets do it" type of sparring. WT in particular is designed to defend in an instant in a confrontation. A large percent of the time these confrontations are from a bully or Mugger who is still in the verbal assault mode and well within the critical distance when we start striking.

    and we do have alot of material on crossing into that zone safely.

    But if the only flaw with the techniques is how the demo was filmed, I am fine with that.... :5eek:
    Last edited by Dr._Tzun_Tzu; 8/29/2005 9:03pm at .
  9. I aint punchy!? is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    686

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 11:43pm


     Style: Arnis, WC, Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr._Tzun_Tzu
    I agree with the demo flaw. It is just a demo.

    I agree with your post. I wanted to isolate this one point. Wing Chun in its origin is not ment for squared off, "you ready, ok, I am too, lets do it" type of sparring. WT in particular is designed to defend in an instant in a confrontation. A large percent of the time these confrontations are from a bully or Mugger who is still in the verbal assault mode and well within the critical distance when we start striking.

    and we do have alot of material on crossing into that zone safely.

    But if the only flaw with the techniques is how the demo was filmed, I am fine with that.... :5eek:
    I have to disagree with you here. I think WC is more than up to taking on squared-off opponents... in fact this is where I think its real strength is.

    If we take a moment to examine chi-sau... the aim is to manipulate the guard of an opponent such that you can do a strike, hold, sweep or throw. This emphasis on manipulating the guard of an opponent indicates that, at least at some point, this drill was designed to teach the WC practitioner how to defeat people who had squared off for combat. If you take chi-sau to its next logical extension, free-sparring but from a hands-on position, you really are training this skill with aliveness, and possibly with a little bit of the fear that makes a fight so unpredictable.

    Thats not to say that WC can't be used to beat-down on someone who is not in a ready-position, it can of course. However my feeling is that it is a MA that specialised in 'bridging the gap' on opponents who have their 'dukes up' for a fight. Its aim is to bridge that gap and deliver short-range attacks from point blank range.
  10. Lefty is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    646

    Posted On:
    8/29/2005 11:48pm


     Style: FMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I couldnt agree more Punchy,

    Tzu you made it sound like WC was only good for attacking someone who hadnt yet finished telling you to "F*ck off" (verbal abuse). In which case it couldnt really be called self defense.
Page 16 of 23 FirstFirst ... 61213141516 17181920 ... 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.