224688 Bullies, 3780 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 1 to 10 of 37
Page 1 of 4 1 234 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Sickses is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    29

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 11:47am


     Style: JKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    bring sum ving tsun

    I have been unable to miss the point that many people on this forum openly doubt the merits of wing chun and other styles which focus on sensitivity, looseness and rapid reactivity and I fail to really understand it. Of course, wing chun (or any other single martial art) is not a complete system in itself, but it does have useful, applicable, principles to teach. It emphasizes the importance of ambidexterity and how to launch a rapid flurry of attacks through an opening in your opponent's guard - pretty fundamental, if not original fighting skills, right?

    It is best to be jeet kune do about these things - absord what is useful, reject what is blah blah blah, and I'm sure that is how most people would view it. I hesitate to say it, because I suspect I know what will happen, but John Perkins Ki Chuan Do system (again nothing truly original) highlights points which I consider to be important - balance, looseness, using the body as a weapon, etc. I would differ from his system when he understates the danger posed by grapplers - he suggests deliberately going to ground underneath an opponent, and I'm sure many of you have seen the groundfighting clips from the attackproof website. So again, not a complete system, but still there are parts to it which can be applied to 'real' or 'sparring' situations.

    Even the much-lauded bjj, though terrifying to someone who would rather stand up and strike like myself, is not a complete solution to survival on the (cliche coming) 'mean streets', and I suppose that is why so many people cross train. After all, if three people attack you at once, you cannot choke them all at the same time. So I would defend wing chun, ki chuan do, traditional kung fu to a point - they can teach something. BJJ can teach something. MMA can teach a lot. But jeet kune do is bigger than all. I know I am not saying anything original here, but I hate to see wing chun and other styles dismissed out of hand. Except systema. I hate that ****. And drainage ditch ninjas.

    Let us all strive to be complete. I have a long way to go, and must learn some jiu jitsu along the way, it seems. Peace all.

    Sickses.
  2. PizDoff is offline

    .

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18,598

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 11:57am

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    So basically you're saying some systems have good concepts you can take. Additionally, you should take what is good and leave what is bad.

    Anything else?
    Surfing Facebook at work? Spread the good word by adding us on Facebook today! https://www.facebook.com/Bullshido
  3. Sickses is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    29

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 12:05pm


     Style: JKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    hey, I said it wasn't original...
  4. vinhthekid is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,944

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 12:29pm


     Style: BJJ/MMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    then why mention something the broad majority of people on this website already believe in?

    and the ish with traditional systems is, other than esoteric ideas, there is very real applicatory delivery systems readily absorbed from them because they do not pressure test. as a rule.

    and this is coming from a functional jkd guy.
  5. jnp is offline
    jnp's Avatar

    Titanium laced beauty

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    8,230

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 12:37pm

    supporting memberforum leaderstaff
     Style: BJJ, wrestling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    I know I am not saying anything original here...
    Then don't waste Phrost's bandwidth. Hundreds of newer posters have said the exact same thing. Next time, don't start a thread until you do have something original to say.
    Shut the hell up and train.
  6. Virus is offline
    Virus's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,967

    Posted On:
    3/10/2007 11:44pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    I have been unable to miss the point that many people on this forum openly doubt the merits of wing chun and other styles which focus on sensitivity, looseness and rapid reactivity and I fail to really understand it.
    If that "sensitivity" and "rapid reactivity" doesn't relate to an alive situation and use real techniques to train it. It sucks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    Of course, wing chun (or any other single martial art) is not a complete system in itself, but it does have useful, applicable, principles to teach. It emphasizes the importance of ambidexterity and how to launch a rapid flurry of attacks through an opening in your opponent's guard - pretty fundamental, if not original fighting skills, right?
    Useful applicable principles are best learnt from useful applicable styles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    It is best to be jeet kune do about these things - absord what is useful, reject what is blah blah blah, and I'm sure that is how most people would view it. I hesitate to say it, because I suspect I know what will happen, but John Perkins Ki Chuan Do system (again nothing truly original) highlights points which I consider to be important - balance, looseness, using the body as a weapon, etc. I would differ from his system when he understates the danger posed by grapplers - he suggests deliberately going to ground underneath an opponent, and I'm sure many of you have seen the groundfighting clips from the attackproof website. So again, not a complete system, but still there are parts to it which can be applied to 'real' or 'sparring' situations.
    Attackproof is a laughing stock around here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    Even the much-lauded bjj, though terrifying to someone who would rather stand up and strike like myself, is not a complete solution to survival on the (cliche coming) 'mean streets', and I suppose that is why so many people cross train.
    BJJ works at what it does under alive conditions in it's specific range. Wing Chun doesn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    After all, if three people attack you at once, you cannot choke them all at the same time. So I would defend wing chun, ki chuan do, traditional kung fu to a point - they can teach something.
    Those styles you've named have never been proven to work against one person, let alone three.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    BJJ can teach something. MMA can teach a lot. But jeet kune do is bigger than all. I know I am not saying anything original here, but I hate to see wing chun and other styles dismissed out of hand. Except systema. I hate that ****. And drainage ditch ninjas.
    Please explain how you can rip on systema and ditch ninjers while at the same time praising styles with no greater success than these in MMA, full-contact striking, submission grappling, or even just decent sparring footage on youtube.
  7. Sickses is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    29

    Posted On:
    3/11/2007 3:31am


     Style: JKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by viator
    I'd instead argue that the site mantra is, "Absorb what has been proven useful, and accept what is not." Nobody like the systems you've mentioned because they don't see them as having been proven to work, at least not as they're taught, without excessive external modification.
    I agree that excessive external modification is required to make wing chun work in an 'alive' situation, and that certainly it is too grid-based and rigid to be applicable to any chaotic situation. I just hate to see these things discarded for the sake of it, and still believe that sensitivity and, to a point, 'sticky' fighting can be applied to real situations.

    Attack proof is partly a laughing stock on these pages due to its dismissal of grappling styles, which I also disagree with it on, and its own frankly bizarre groundfighting techniques. Bullshido is frequented by many bjj/grappling practicioners who seem to take this dismissal personally, as many people take insults to their their MA as a personal matter. Understandable with something you put so much time and effort into, I guess. KCD stresses the importance of yielding, fluidity and striking from any position, however, which is surely just common sense (if not actually groundbreaking new ideas on their part).

    I am told that most people here already agree with the principles of jeet kune do, and yet it seems many fail to find the good hidden within some of these less fashionable systems. I guess training time is finite and we must all work with what we feel benefits us best per unit time. I am no world class warrior, but my mind is open to learning anything from any source I can.

    Thanks for your well-reasoned comments, guys.
    Peace all. S.
  8. Virus is offline
    Virus's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,967

    Posted On:
    3/11/2007 4:33am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    If someone can clearly demonstrate some "hidden" under alive conditions then it might be worth further investigation. So far, all non-sport martial arts either looks like a bad version of sports when sparring or is a dead pattern.
  9. Sickses is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    29

    Posted On:
    3/11/2007 4:36am


     Style: JKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Virus
    Please explain how you can rip on systema and ditch ninjers while at the same time praising styles with no greater success than these in MMA, full-contact striking, submission grappling, or even just decent sparring footage on youtube.
    Thanks, virus, that was supposed to be ironic, really, or at least an imitation of those people who reasonably argue the cause for their chosen style, and for mma/ufc (which really is a sporting form of jeet kune do, taking bits from all over) and then rip on what they think is an easy target. I don't have that much knowledge of systema, or, er drainage ditch ninjas, who I think are a dying breed, but I accept the *possibility* that I could learn at least something from either. The guy who sparred against the ditch ninjas with hedgehogey (whose name I forget) said he was beaten in one round by one of them, so even they have something to impart, I guess.

    You are basically right, I feel. Praise what works, knock what does not. But Bruce Lee learned a lot from wing chun, although he too felt that it was too rigid, and he is responsible for much good fight footage, some of which I am sure you could find on youtube (which is itslef not the definitive martial arts litmus test).
    Peace all. S.
    Last edited by Sickses; 3/11/2007 7:20am at .
  10. jnp is offline
    jnp's Avatar

    Titanium laced beauty

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    8,230

    Posted On:
    3/11/2007 12:51pm

    supporting memberforum leaderstaff
     Style: BJJ, wrestling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sickses
    ... and for mma/ufc (which really is a sporting form of jeet kune do, taking bits from all over)
    Do you honestly believe this?
    Shut the hell up and train.
Page 1 of 4 1 234 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.