Few techniques to beat many...

[PiedmontChun]

I thought this was a good thread that got horribly derailed, and yes, the definition of "troll" seems to fit aptly here.

 

[wtxs]

Wow somebody gets the title "troll" really easy with you don't they?

If someone criticizes something they are a troll?
You having it really tough in real life i guess.


You should make a movie about that instead of your so called Youtube lessons.

Just to be fair to KPM, are you confident enough of your Silat to post some video for all to see? And while you are at it, demo why, in your opinion WC is not effective.

 

[Vajramusti]

Best to ignore the derailment and go back to the thread.
It was interesting to see the video that geezer posted
and Leung Ting's demo.
I am not a fan of Leung Ting and there are many versions of wing chun. One of the problems in discussions
is that people over generalize about what wing chun is or isn't.

 

[Marnetmar]

I must say I have some pretty strong opinions about LT myself, but I'm not gonna go into that

So, how about this whole Wing Chun thing everyone?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Since there is no master key, the MA training is to find the right key to open the right lock. So far, this discussion only stay in the boundary of the "striking art". If you can knock your opponent down before the clinch happen, that's fine.

What if you can't knock your opponent down before the clinch happen? Can you still use "few techniques to beat many"? What will you do when your opponent gets

- head lock,
- double over hooks,
- double under hooks,
- bear hug,
-...

on you?

- How do you get out of it?
- How do you counter?
- Does your "few techniques" still work at that moment?

 

[Vajramusti]

For me - yes. I don't depend on memorized techniques.

 

[geezer]

Since there is no master key, the MA training is to find the right key to open the right lock. So far, this discussion only stay in the boundary of the "striking art". If you can knock your opponent down before the clinch happen, that's fine.

What if you can't knock your opponent down before the clinch happen? Can you still use "few techniques to beat many"? What will you do when your opponent gets

- head lock,
- double over hooks,
- double under hooks,
- bear hug,
-...

on you?

- How do you get out of it?
- How do you counter?
- Does your "few techniques" still work at that moment?

There is no one perfect technique to apply to all such situations. I hope I did not imply that. But there are techniques that can be adapted to handle a great variety of situations.

"Using a few techniques to beat many" is a strategy that can apply to many styles, and all ranges. It is an attitude or frame of mind that works for better for some than others. Maybe it depends on your temperament or outlook? Sort of like seeing the forest or the trees.

In wrestling, I knew a guy who had only one great takedown. And everybody knew it. But he could set you up so many ways, that it was really tough to counter --even though you knew it was coming!

Or how about Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. He had one great kick. Everybody knew it. But he could still land it.





Now here's an example more in the vein of my earlier observation about the "Sun-Fist" punch:

My old escrima teacher was a huge advocate of simplicity. He could counter most of what came at him just by adjusting his angle and counter striking with astounding speed, force, and accuracy.

If necessary, his strike would simultaneously function as deflection (or "interference strike") or as a block as needed. It was amazing how he could adapt (or "transition") the same basic dynamic into so many situations and ranges, with or without weapons. And always using a concept that we, in WC, know as "da sau jik si siu sau" or "Attacking hand is defending hand" as well as "lin siu di dar" or "simultaneous defense and attack".

One technique to beat many. A few techniques to beat all... if done very very well.

 

[zuti car]

First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters

 

[drop bear]

There is no one perfect technique to apply to all such situations. I hope I did not imply that. But there are techniques that can be adapted to handle a great variety of situations.

"Using a few techniques to beat many" is a strategy that can apply to many styles, and all ranges. It is an attitude or frame of mind that works for better for some than others. Maybe it depends on your temperament or outlook? Sort of like seeing the forest or the trees.

In wrestling, I knew a guy who had only one great takedown. And everybody knew it. But he could set you up so many ways, that it was really tough to counter --even though you knew it was coming!

Or how about Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. He had one great kick. Everybody knew it. But he could still land it.





Now here's an example more in the vein of my earlier observation about the "Sun-Fist" punch:

My old escrima teacher was a huge advocate of simplicity. He could counter most of what came at him just by adjusting his angle and counter striking with astounding speed, force, and accuracy.

If necessary, his strike would simultaneously function as deflection (or "interference strike") or as a block as needed. It was amazing how he could adapt (or "transition") the same basic dynamic into so many situations and ranges, with or without weapons. And always using a concept that we, in WC, know as "da sau jik si siu sau" or "Attacking hand is defending hand" as well as "lin siu di dar" or "simultaneous defense and attack".

One technique to beat many. A few techniques to beat all... if done very very well.

But you still cannot escape complexity. The many different set ups timing and correct technique generally take years to perfect.

 

[yak sao]

But you still cannot escape complexity. The many different set ups timing and correct technique generally take years to perfect.

If you move forward attacking the center, situations tend to take care of themselves. If your arms are properly relaxed and springy then your
punches either find their target or they are momentarily deformed into a tan ,bong ,jum ,etc. and immediately spring back out continuing on the attack. Same goes for the legs. They should be occupying the lower gate with kicks ,leg checks ,stop kicks and so on.

There is no set up. Only intercepting.

 

[Marnetmar]

First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters

Sounds like somebody's trying to avoid a discussion

 

[Argus]

First , what is a technique ? Memorized set of movements to deal with some situation or something else? Then, what is "few techniques"? Two ?five? ten? We have to know what we are talking about , to define the parameters

"Techniques" in Wing Chun are more like a few basic shapes and structures which can flow from one to the next, depending on the pressure we encounter, or lack thereof. A punch is a bong is a tan is a hyun is a fuk is a jam is a strike is a jut, etc. Every action is an action in progress, and need not be committed to and completed, nor applied in any kind of sequence; it changes as necessary.

You can think of these "techniques" in Wing Chun as being grouped into three basic structures / concepts: tan, fuk, and bong, which morph one to the next to navigate any pressure or obstacles they encounter and flow through to find or create openings.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you move forward attacking the center, situations tend to take care of themselves. ... There is no set up. Only intercepting.

If you are a wrestler, do you prefer to fight a boxer, or do you prefer to fight a WC guy? You may prefer to fight a WC guy for the following reasons:

A WC guy will love to

- move in toward you. He will not hop around, apply "fire" strategy, and move like a ghost.
- build "arm bridge" with you. It will save you 1/2 the effort to build the "clinch" that you are looking for.

If you look at this from a wrestler's point of view, the concept to "move forward" and "intercept" can be a 2 edges sword. It may help you. It may also help your wrestler opponent.

 

[Kwan Sau]

A WC guy will love to

- move in toward you. He will not hop around, apply "fire" strategy, and move like a ghost.
- build "arm bridge" with you. It will save you 1/2 the effort to build the "clinch" that you are looking for.

1. how does someone 'move like a ghost'? Never seen one myself... :lfao:
2. not all WC'ers seek to build "arm bridges"...

 

[yak sao]

If you are a wrestler, do you prefer to fight a boxer, or do you prefer to fight a WC guy? You may prefer to fight a WC guy for the following reasons:

A WC guy will love to

- move in toward you. He will not hop around, apply "fire" strategy, and move like a ghost.
- build "arm bridge" with you. It will save you 1/2 the effort to build the "clinch" that you are looking for.

If you look at this from a wrestler's point of view, the concept to "move forward" and "intercept" can be a 2 edges sword. It may help you. It may also help your wrestler opponent.

Chi sau training is not simply a way to deal with strikers. Chi sau teaches a WC fighter how to deal with pressures placed on the body and arms. Chi sau does not teach us to stick for the sake of sticking. The goal is always to hit, and to do so in such a way as to keep ourselves protected behind our arm/legs.
If an opening is found, we continue to strike through it until we end the threat (ie. knock him out/down) or until the opponent closes it off. In which case the arms seek the least path of resistance once again seeking the opening to strike.
Force placed upon the arms and body by a grappler is dealt with in much the same way. Our structures that we use to dissolve, disperse, redirect a strike can also be used to keep a wrestler from tying up our arms or cause us to lose balance. All the while, punching, elbowing etc. Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.
WC was developed to fight in close. Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

1. how does someone 'move like a ghost'? Never seen one myself ...

It's not that hard to do. If you just concentrate 100% your effort on not to let your opponent to touch you,

you can

- forget about all your attack,
- circle around your opponent,
- always move yourself into the symmetry position that your opponent intend to move,
- ...

Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.

You don't need to wrestle a wrestler. But you should get some wrestlers and test your skill against them. Try to spar a wrestler 15 rounds daily. The rules can be as simple as:

- If you can knock your wrestler opponent down first, you win that round. For safety issue, you can replace "knock down" by "your hand touches your opponent's face".
- If your opponent can take you down first, he win that round. You can ignore the ground game and follow on strikes at this moment.

Try to test this for 3 months, collect the final result, modify your training, and develop your personal strategies.

 

[drop bear]

Chi sau training is not simply a way to deal with strikers. Chi sau teaches a WC fighter how to deal with pressures placed on the body and arms. Chi sau does not teach us to stick for the sake of sticking. The goal is always to hit, and to do so in such a way as to keep ourselves protected behind our arm/legs.
If an opening is found, we continue to strike through it until we end the threat (ie. knock him out/down) or until the opponent closes it off. In which case the arms seek the least path of resistance once again seeking the opening to strike.
Force placed upon the arms and body by a grappler is dealt with in much the same way. Our structures that we use to dissolve, disperse, redirect a strike can also be used to keep a wrestler from tying up our arms or cause us to lose balance. All the while, punching, elbowing etc. Our goal is always to never try to out wrestle a wrestler.
WC was developed to fight in close. Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?

Well we don't know if they did or didn't all we can look at is how it applies practically to that type of attack. Especially the very modern striking resistant grappling being used today.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Do you really think its founders never considered what to do against grapplers who also like to fight in close?

I don't think any striking art system on this planet that has been tested completely against the grappling art system.

If we look at the following "under hook counter" clip (at 0.23), it was used by a wrestler to against another wrestler. It's very difficult to find any "under hook counter" clip that is used by a striker to deal with a wrestler? Why? Because the concept of "under hook" may be foreign, or may be not important from a striker's point of view. A striker may not know that just by raising his arm straight up in the air can free his arm from under hook. Such a simple and effortless method to disable your opponent's "under hook" (of course to take advantage on it instead of just to escape out of it is much better solution). In other words, our striking art founders might not have tested their principles/techniques "enough" against wrestlers. If they did, those information should be recorded as part of the striking art system.

Of course, if you are just interested in "sport", a

- Judo guy don't need to worry about the striking art.
- boxer don't need to worry about the grappling art.

but if you care about "combat (some people may prefer to call it self-defense)", you do have to understand the other side of the fence.

 

[geezer]

...A striker may not know that just by raising his arm straight up in the air can free his arm from under hook. Such a simple and effortless method to disable your opponent's "under hook" (of course to take advantage on it instead of just to escape out of it is much better solution). In other words, our striking art founders might not have tested their principles/techniques "enough" against wrestlers. If they did, those information should be recorded as part of the striking art system.

Recorded in the system? ...as in Biu Tze?

 

[Kwan Sau]

Recorded in the system? ...as in Biu Tze?

Yep!!! Right there... Well said Geezer.