WC Punch

[Phobius]

Strategy, positioning, imposition of game plan, closing options, forcing reaction

In other words you have no answer?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Never said anything about always, but if you don't know how to close options or draw responses, that's your problem.

How to punch your opponent is your business. How your opponent may block your punch will be his business.

When you punch at your opponent's face, your opponent uses hay-maker to knock your striking arm down, can you still be able to punch him with the same arm as 1 move?

 

[SaulGoodman]

So much for the "VEETEE" "abstract drills", now they're all application based

 

[guy b.]

In other words you have no answer?

That's the answer you will get, because you don't offer to engage in discussion. It is a correct answer, but detail is lacking.

 

[wckf92]

When you punch at your opponent's face, your opponent uses hay-maker to knock your striking arm down, can you still be able to punch him with the same arm as 1 move?

I think LFJ means that there are times when (given your example) that a secondary "clearing hand" (pak... jut... etc) is used to allow the punch to continue on its way.

 

[guy b.]

If the opponent is intent on making arm contact they won't fare too well vs VT

 

[KPM]

That's the answer you will get, because you don't offer to engage in discussion. It is a correct answer, but detail is lacking.

That was a "non-answer" if I ever saw one! We've been engaging in discussion plenty here. Kind of interesting that when the discussion isn't going your way then you are the one being evasive and not answering as you accuse others of doing.

 

[KPM]

If the opponent is intent on making arm contact they won't fare too well vs VT

How about when the opponent is intent on avoiding arm contact and isn't punching nice and straight down the center-line? That's what I keep asking about that you guys don't seem to have an answer for.

 

[geezer]

If the opponent is intent on making arm contact they won't fare too well vs VT

Kinda depends on what they are trying to do. Like most coming from a VT perspective, I prefer chasing center, not hands. But there are other ways to go as well.

I had an Escrima student get into it with a co-worker on a construction site. the other guy threw a couple of punches at my student while he was standing holding his cell phone. My student stepped off-line, keeping range and made arm contact. Hard arm contact. A couple of times ...using a hammer-fist (#1 strike) with the corner of his cell phone right on the back of the other guy's fist and forearm each time he threw a punch.

It shut the guy down fast. And the guy was told to pick up his paycheck and clear out. Meanwhile, my student pocketed his phone and went back to work. Anyway that's his story.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I prefer chasing center, not hands.

If your opponent's arms are in his center, to chase his center is to chase his arms. Here is an example.

 

[yak sao]

Kinda depends on what they are trying to do. Like most coming from a VT perspective, I prefer chasing center, not hands. But there are other ways to go as well.

I had an Escrima student get into it with a co-worker on a construction site. the other guy threw a couple of punches at my student while he was standing holding his cell phone. My student stepped off-line, keeping range and made arm contact. Hard arm contact. A couple of times ...using a hammer-fist (#1 strike) with the corner of his cell phone right on the back of the other guy's fist and forearm each time he threw a punch.

It shut the guy down fast. And the guy was told to pick up his paycheck and clear out. Meanwhile, my student pocketed his phone and went back to work. Anyway that's his story.

That might make a pretty good cell phone commercial.
Kind of a variation on T imex's "takes a lickin and keeps on tickin"......how bout " gives a beatin and goes on tweetin"?

 

[LFJ]

Draw responses has nothing to do with the subject, you cant expect to draw responses in such a way that opponent will not do round attacks.

If you don't know how to draw responses, that's your problem. Say you can't.

Even some boxers are quite good at it in their own way. Mayweather's Philly Shell defense encouraged the same linear punches it was built to counter, with one side "exposed" it would bait and get opponents to overextend, then he'd counterpunch them and move out again.

This is not what I do, but it is an example of drawing a certain type of attack you are poised to deal with.

Closing options is interesting, you honestly think you can close down the options of doing round attacks on you? Truly? And this without using footwork as a solution?

Who the hell said without footwork? Why are you taking my footwork away?

Keep in mind that KPM just asked how you deal with round attacks and it seems you are claiming you dont worry about those because more often than not you have that option closed down.

That's not what he asked. He specifically asked how I would use the same arm to deflect a round attack while striking in the same action (misapplying LSDD). It's a nonsensical question assuming that I'm walking into round punches where he would use taan-da.

Drawing responses and closing options is not fantasy. It's just that you and KPM are like most other WC practitioners. You can tell me all the glories of taan-da and other techniques, but when we come to details of free fighting strategy and tactics you are wholly without a clue.

 

[LFJ]

---Weren't you the one that was very big on things being all "abstract" in your "VT"? And now you are essentially assuming everything done in this drill would be done this way in a fighting situation?

I'm not assuming that. I don't care about your applications. I'm concerned with not violating multiple VT principles and not de-training core attributes in the course of drilling whatever it is you're drilling.

You can't look past the direct "application" of what they are doing? The Gan Sau and punch can easily be seen as uses any time you are able to pin the opponent's arm momentarily in a low position and punch through. The opponent then learns to counter this trap by using the Biu Sau or Fak Sau. The Lop Da drill is just a training "platform" into which this is inserted for drilling purposes.

It's not a feasible counter as it fails even in the drill. It doesn't have a chance of accomplishing anything against a live human with two arms. It's entirely pointless.

Plus, his wu-sau is not trapped and should be trained to immediately counterpunch. Not doing so for "drilling purposes" is de-training LSJC. Poor trade!

The second problem is with the student's response. His wu-sau is just hanging out, serving no purpose whatsoever while his other arm is following the teacher's actions and extending fully straight in an elbow-out, upward swing.

---Its a drill!

Exactly. And if LSJC is trained to be unresponsive even in beginner drilling, it will not be reliable under the pressures of free fighting either.

That's something that should never be done outside of perhaps emergency situations. Why is it in a beginner drill like this?

---Says who? Why should using a Fak Sau when your arms are trapped low be limited to Biu Gee level teaching. Is that an Ip Man rule we don't know about? Fak Sau is found in the Siu Nim Tau form!

That is not a faak-sau as done in SNT, and his "arms" are not trapped. He has a free but unresponsive wu-sau.

The way I have been trained, I would have to fight hard for my wu-sau not to instinctively punch in that moment.

You did not even mention LSJC issues in your response. It's impossible you don't see this now that it has been pointed out to you. To defend the lineage, you must wilfully deny that this is obviously de-training LSJC.

 

[LFJ]

When you punch at your opponent's face, your opponent uses hay-maker to knock your striking arm down, can you still be able to punch him with the same arm as 1 move?

I will not go squaring off and exchanging punches like that.

 

[LFJ]

Not an appeal to majority. It's an objective truth anyone can go experience for themselves. The number of people who have doesn't make it so, but it's an intriguing number.

---I'm sure John could track down his three friends that were noted if he had to and get them to state what they said for the record. How is that any less "objective" than your "thousands". Do you have a record of each and every one of these "thousands"?

You would be asking us to take three guys at their word for something we can't personally verify.

I'm saying there is an enormous number of people who have gone and experienced something that you can go and directly experience for yourself too.

Yes. There are droves of former WT practitioners and others in Europe who would not go back to their former lineages if forced at gunpoint. You can go meet them, talk to them about their experience, and see for yourself what they saw.

Not an Appeal to Majority. Just an objective fact an intriguing number of people have experienced, but more importantly, that you can experience too.

 

[LFJ]

@Phobius @KPM

Since you guys think drawing responses and closing options is fantasy, here's an article I found for you to read.

It's about how to bait and force all kinds of attacks you want in boxing; from the type of punch, to the specific arm, the specific angle, etc..

Baiting and Forcing Counters

We have similar baiting and closing concepts in VT, only with our methods, not boxing. It's called fighting strategy and tactics. Not reactive taan-da and other puppet techniques.

A few pertinent quotes:

"Great fighters don’t wait for their opponents’ punches,
Great fighters FORCE their opponents punches!"

"The best fighters don’t wait for counters,
they force the counters."

"Learn how to make your opponent throw the punches you want,
so you can land the counters you want."

 

[Phobius]

Since you guys think drawing responses and closing options is fantasy, here's an article I found for you to read.

It's about how to bait and force all kinds of attacks you want in boxing; from the type of punch, to the specific arm, the specific angle, etc..

Baiting and Forcing Counters

I guess I need to tell you something. You can not prevent a round attack by drawing responses. If you watched boxing or trained in it you should know that doing baits all the time sets you up for receiving a beating because you become predictable.

This is the fantasy you seem to have, that you can avoid round attacks altogether using baiting and closing down options.

Baiting is not a defensive move, it is offensive. Besides you can't bait people to do something they are not thinking. Instead you read their play, figure out how to bait them and then wham.

What you were asked was defensive strategy on round attacks given LSDD being primary option.

Saying you use footwork instead in those cases would be an answer. But to say you bait and close options so people will not do round attacks on you just sounds silly and ignorant.

So thanks for that lesson, but it was a bit out of topic and not even close to related to what I was saying.

 

[wckf92]

Plus, his wu-sau is not trapped and should be trained to immediately counterpunch. He has a free but unresponsive wu-sau..

Yeah I caught that as well. That bit seemed a bit off, at least to how I am trained. If someone rips my bong sau out of position my wu sau explodes forward to strike. (and feet also if needed). To do otherwise, IMHO, is to cheat yourself and to rob your training partner of his ability to train the response to my incoming wu / punch...(in that drill).

 

[Dylan9d]

Just a question in general since I had 2 lessons of WSLVT in the past, very nice guys there.....

My question, does VT/WC/WT generally goes for the face ? Because thats the general tactic I see in movies etc.....

 

[KPM]

@Phobius @KPM

Since you guys think drawing responses and closing options is fantasy, here's an article I found for you to read.

It's about how to bait and force all kinds of attacks you want in boxing; from the type of punch, to the specific arm, the specific angle, etc..

Baiting and Forcing Counters

."

Thanks. Nice article. But as I said to Guy on the other thread, you two seem to think of Wing Chun as a boxing style and are looking for an exchange of blows. Your response above pretty much proves that. But how is that going to help you against the street thug that has a wide loopy "haymaker" coming right at your temple as soon as you realize he is behind you and you turn to see him? And, again as I said to Guy on that thread, if your WSLVT is such a vastly superior punching method compared to boxing, why aren't we seeing video footage of WSLVT guys easily handling boxers? Why aren't we seeing WSLVT guys showing up in boxing matches or MMA matches?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The way you two describe WSLVT sounds very "one-dimensional." Now you seem to be saying you don't need to worry about non-linear, non-centerline punches because your fighting strategy can guarantee that the opponent won't be able to throw them. You don't need things like Tan Da or Gan Da, etc because you can always counter with one arm while striking with the same arm using LSDD. You don't need other kinds of attacks or Chin Na elements or any of that because all you need is the punch!