"No Outside Game," or Another Thread About Hybrid Arts

[Juany118]

Well people always think that VT is the superior art for close in fighting they forget about alot of other styles, like Kali/Eskrima/Arnis and Silat/Pukulan. We won't use our hands that much close in but we will elbows

Indeed but some here on the WC forum and not just myself, @geezer and @Danny T among them, study WC along side FMA and we see where they come together. .

 

[Hazardi172]

Sorry, I am going to be blunt but leave it at this. Then you do not understand what a place is in a real fight. Every place has a greater or lesser purpose. The good fighter knows where their greatest strength lies. They of course adapt and go where the fight forces them to go, but in a fight each fighter is seeking their sweet spot.

VT has quite a simple strategy which I prefer to follow rather than using ideas from other systems.

A kicker is trying to stay at kicking range. A boxer where he can get maximum effect of his punches alone. A person who can punch elbow and kick wants to be in that sweet spot. It's a chess game, trying to see who can get control of their optimum range. Sometimes you need to settle because the opponent has initiative. That doesn't mean the place that is your sweet spot ceases to exist, it only means reality dictated you can't get there at the moment

I think this is a naive oversimplification of what fighting entails. We wish to hit the opponent which we can do at a range of different distances. Hitting requires movement in order to create attacking opportunities. Therefore we are always moving, the distance between us and the opponent is always changing, and we are always hitting from different ranges. There is no particular distance from the opponent where we always aim to stand.

 

[Juany118]

Opening a path to hit is VT that I am familiar with. Opening a path to grapple is not so much.

For striking it's not "to grapple" as you seem to infer I think. If I am not mistaken you are thinking of a grapple as a "lock". In short we now wrestle. That is not the case. All, to my training at least, is "to grapple" means "to grab", even if but a millisecond. What you do next the fight dictates. If I mean to strike I release the "grapple" as I strike because I do not wish to be open for a counter.

 

[Juany118]

VT has quite a simple strategy which I prefer to follow rather than using ideas from other systems.



I think this is a naive oversimplification of what fighting entails. We wish to hit the opponent which we can do at a range of different distances. Hitting requires movement in order to create attacking opportunities. Therefore we are always moving, the distance between us and the opponent is always changing, and we are always hitting from different ranges. There is no particular distance from the opponent where we always aim to stand.

You may call it naive from your training in a school. I call it reality because for the last 26 years I have fought in BDUs or in Blue. A good fighter flows to their advantage. If they are on the back foot (and I have been there) they have to accept somehow they were lacking. The point of undeniable fact is that every style of fighting has a particular strength. If they did not all styles would be the same and thes seperate forums would not even exist.

All fighting is about flow but each fighter wants to flow where they are stronger. Being a still skinny as hell 45 year old fighting to arrest kids half my age perhaps give me a unique perspective on this point.

 

[Hazardi172]

You haven't trained anything other than Ving Tsun?

It is more that mixing other ideas into VT is detrimental. It is no longer a system if you add other things that overlap. I don't view VT as a system that is lacking anything in terms of striking.

The main gap with VT is grappling. Since there is no overlap you can add something here if you like. But adding grappling you then need to decide which system is primary and which secondary.

You can't always hit, I would refer to your first remark, try clinching with a kickboxer/muay thay guy, hell even we Silat guys can bring a mean clinch, from which we won't let you hit.

Clinching is not a goal in VT

 

[Hazardi172]

For striking it's not "to grapple" as you seem to infer I think. If I am not mistaken you are thinking of a grapple as a "lock". In short we now wrestle. That is not the case. All, to my training at least, is "to grapple" means "to grab", even if but a millisecond. What you do next the fight dictates. If I mean to strike I release the "grapple" as I strike because I do not wish to be open for a counter.

If you can punch why would you grab? This would be chasing of hands.

 

[Hazardi172]

I call it reality because for the last 26 years I have fought in BDUs or in Blue.

I don't know what this means. I think before you said you were some kind of pro streetfighter? Can you elaborate?

The point of undeniable fact is that every style of fighting has a particular strength. If they did not all styles would be the same and thes seperate forums would not even exist.

I would agree- the particular strength of VT is striking. This is not the same thing as saying that there is an ideal place to stand in relation to the opponent, which is clearly naive in a fight.

All fighting is about flow but each fighter wants to flow where they are stronger.

I don't know what flow means. In VT we want to hit the opponent until they fall down. This is all it is really, quite simple.

 

[Dylan9d]

It is more that mixing other ideas into VT is detrimental. It is no longer a system if you add other things that overlap. I don't view VT as a system that is lacking anything in terms of striking.

The main gap with VT is grappling. Since there is no overlap you can add something here if you like. But adding grappling you then need to decide which system is primary and which secondary.



Clinching is not a goal in VT

What about untrained folks? Or folks from other styles or systems, I know it's not the goal for VT, but do you think that other will clinch you? and what happens if they do? you freeze up because you never trained on it?

By the way, my question wasn't to put you on the spot or anything it was a serious question if you have trained or experienced other systems.

I don't know what flow means. In VT we want to hit the opponent until they fall down. This is all it is really, quite simple.

Ok but did you also trained the striking on a Kickboxer? Muay Thay guy? Judo guys? Or the streetbrawler? Or did you only trained VT vs VT?

 

[Juany118]

I don't know what this means. I think before you said you were some kind of pro streetfighter? Can you elaborate?

What that means is that the History Teacher that said "no" to teaching became a Recon Scout in the US Army. He then has spent 19 years as a police officer in a town/city where fighting with someone to effect an arrest is basically a weekly event.

BDU is the "old school" term for the US Army Uniform. The Police in the US are the "thin blue line" between civilation and chaos. That is my perspective. Hence BDU and Blue.

Does this mean the way I fight is the best? Nope.

But I know how a fight progresses. That I have sweet spots and weak spots. Anyone who is planning on having to fight (and I hope most don't) need to think critically about those "spots" because that is how combat works.

 

[KPM]

VT fist builds the body, movement, habits and reactions so that one fights as VT. Without long training this is impossible, since VT is difficult.

When this is achieved then testing is a required next step.

OK Guy. But again, pretty much EVERY video of PB floating around on the internet features him doing a lot of Bong/Laap/Da kind of motions. So if this has no direct application in real fighting, then his training must be pretty inefficient.

 

[Juany118]

OK Guy. But again, pretty much EVERY video of PB floating around on the internet features him doing a lot of Bong/Laap/Da kind of motions. So if this has no direct application in real fighting, then his training must be pretty inefficient.

So you noted the odd timing of the account creation as I did a bit ago? Glad to know I am not solo.

 

[KPM]

I think that these 2 ideas are not necessarily opposed to one another.
While I wholeheartedly agree that our response in a stressful encounter is going to revert back to the lowest common denominator of our training, in other words, the things that.happen automatically because we've practiced it thousands of times; there comes a point where our body just moves naturally as a result of our training, seeking the most economical solution to the problem.

I agree. So to say that you are going to do thousands or reps of a Bong/Laap/Punch cycle in training....but to also say this is not applied or used in real fighting makes no sense. And to train thousands of reps of a form that teaches you to draw your fist back to your hip repeatedly (which may get you killed in real fight) also makes no sense. This is why you should train the way you hope to fight. If you are in-graining bad habits that could get you killed in a real encounter, that is a bad thing! If you are training things that you are truly going to make a point of NOT doing in a real encounter, that is inefficient. If you are spending lots of time training something that will never show up in a real encounter, then you are training a martial art but you are not training a fighting art.

 

[KPM]

So you noted the odd timing of the account creation as I did a bit ago? Glad to know I am not solo.

Yeah. Guy gets banned and "Hazardi" shows up. Hazardi hits on nearly every key point in an argument that Guy has used in the past. Hazardi uses the same posting style...playing dumb to draw out comments that he can then pounce upon....as Guy. Either WSLPB lineage really indoctrinates its people, or Guy has been resurrected!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I hear you, but really? Out of the countless people who train in Wing Chun, it has drawn NO competitive people?

Likely those who are competitive trained in multiple arts, so you won't find a pure stylist from Wing Chun (or almost anything) in MMA. Since the good coaches are focused around a few styles that have a solid track record, anyone training for MMA is likely to get a fair amount of those styles. I also get the impression that Wing Chun doesn't favor heavy punches, opting instead to overwhelm. From what I see in MMA, heavy strikes are necessary if you're going to depend upon strikes.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Then again, no such place exists

Entirely untrue. Every strike has a "best possible distance" for a given target. It can be used at a range of distances, but that one distance is where access and power are optimal. It exists every time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The best place to stand in order to attack the opponent varies depending upon what the opponent is doing. There is no sweet spot better than all others because in fighting things change always.

That "best place" you just mentioned? That is the "sweet spot" in that moment.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is more that mixing other ideas into VT is detrimental. It is no longer a system if you add other things that overlap. I don't view VT as a system that is lacking anything in terms of striking.

The main gap with VT is grappling. Since there is no overlap you can add something here if you like. But adding grappling you then need to decide which system is primary and which secondary.



Clinching is not a goal in VT

It might not be in VT, but what if your opponent isn't playing your game?

 

[Hazardi172]

OK Guy. But again, pretty much EVERY video of PB floating around on the internet features him doing a lot of Bong/Laap/Da kind of motions. So if this has no direct application in real fighting, then his training must be pretty inefficient.

I think you have me mixed up with someone else. I am not Guy.

Video of Philipp Bayer on the internet mostly shows him doing chi sau, lap sau and other drills. The VT drills are very important in order to build and maintain the VT attributes and habits in the body. They are therefore not directly applicable to fighting, in that we don't try to initiate drills during fighting, but they are still essential to fighting. The difficult bit in VT is gaining and maintaining the skill set. Fighting is the simple bit. All VT entails testing (fighting) as an integral part of the development process.

 

[Hazardi172]

That "best place" you just mentioned? That is the "sweet spot" in that moment.

So, since it it is infinitely variable, no sweet spot exists.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I would agree- the particular strength of VT is striking. This is not the same thing as saying that there is an ideal place to stand in relation to the opponent, which is clearly naive in a fight.

You seem to be stuck on this idea of standing still, though several of us have corrected your assertion. It's not a matter of standing in one place ("an ideal place to stand"), but of the ideal range from which to execute a given strike. It's part of why you choose one strike over another - some strikes are better when you are close, while others are better when you are a bit farther away. You either select the right strike for the distance and situation, or you move to a good distance for a strike in the situation. No standing still. Make sense?