WT vs. grappling attack

Posted by: Tezza

WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 06:59 AM

Firstly I am not trying to make a flame war I am just trying to get a WC/WT view on it and also to start a new thread of interest. I have trained in this area, although I would like to hear your views on it.
So with all that talk on WT/WC vs. MMA, what do you think is the best way to respond to a wrestling or shoot fighting attack from a wing chun perspective?
Posted by: Fisherman

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 08:22 AM

Do you use elbows or knees? That may be a good start.
Posted by: Tezza

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 08:35 AM

Yes definately a lot of elbow work is done. I have studied the basic grappling work done in Wing Chun I was just interested to see what others do in the circumstances and what has worked best for them.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 09:59 AM

knees and sprawl.

for very crisp low shoots sprawl.
If you feel like you can knee then knee hard and fast.
I have seen other variations using a fook sao ect..
Sprawl isn't really WC, but you can use WC ideas. like push/pull, low center, ect..
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 10:06 AM

I agree with monji on this one - even my sifu says that WC has a lot of answers but not all of them. Developing a good sprawl is definitely the easiest way to defend a take down. And since it puts your attacker horizontally upside down and under you, you can attack the back of the head/spine with all sorts of nasty tricks.
Posted by: SLW

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 03:00 PM

I'm arrived at this topic kinda late. Does anyone have a picture of a what a sprawl is?I'm not quite sure what it is and would like to know.

I have seen a video of a cage(not really a cage just locked a on all sides ring) fight in which the judo fighter immediately went for the tackle on the WC fighter and failed to bring him down until the WC fighter lifted his leg to kick thus disrupting his own balance and fell. The Judo guy kept punching and the WC guy tapped out in no time.

Being a WC student(just completed siu lim tao), I always wanted to think of ways not to end up in this situation. Is side stepping or jumping over his shoulder by stepping on it when he goes for a takedown a useful move?

Or if we sucessfully predict that he is gonna use a takedown(which he does eventually) will trying to use the centreline theory by locating our foot in the middle of his groin beforehand then repeatedly kicking it work?
Posted by: MattJ

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 03:26 PM

Check this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asL8eVM2wPw&search=wrestling

At 0:10 seconds in, the guy in blue shoots in for a takedown. The guy in black/red does a sprawl to counter, driving the guy in blue to the floor.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 03:41 PM

I don’t think you will have time normally to jump over the person. Really basic wrestling skills I think are very important for any style. (That’s why I am going to cross train when I get time in wrestling).


Some clips of sprawls
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDQcTubBlFM&search=sprawl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccaEYUTIHSk&search=sprawl

I heard of also someone doing something similar to a sprawl with a Wing Chun horse. Don’t really know much about wrestling. From what people have shown me the basic idea is drop your weight fast and spread your legs. The main point is to push as much down and forward as possible (mostly down). He has to carry your whole body weight and maybe you can even push with your horse. I have seen people setup for basic neck chokes and knees to the head from the sprawl. I strongly believe you can take the ideas in SLT and other parts of Wing chun and apply them here as in any place in fighting.
Forexample :
I havn’t experimented with this but I am sure you can use the proper WC horse body mechanics for the sprawl. Also A good fook sao could be used or a gum sao. Ect.. I havn’t really messed with this that much but I think it’s a good cover for a low shoot.

If the shoot isn’t low (most are lazy) then I feel comfortable kneeing.

The only way to really be able to handle something like this is to learn how to shoot properly and train it over and over again. Different speeds , levels ect..
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 04:02 PM

With all the interest in ring fighting, most likely due to UFC/Pride, it really is important to cross train. As much as some people would have you believe, WC is not a a pure "style", but is much more a toolkit. Just like when you work on a car - you use a wrench when you need a wrench, not a screwdriver. Shooting did not play into much ring or street combat back in Ip Man's day - those guys were worried enough with Karate, which subsequently Hawkins Cheung cross trained in for the very reason that he wanted to beat karateka. "My technique is your technique" is probably the smartest thing Bruce ever said and it is exemplary of WC theory. Right now WC seems to be in some sort of danger of becoming a dead art because attempts at proving it's ring effectiveness have been futile. I don't think it's the art, but the wrong people representing it. Incorporating a sprawl into your bag of tricks is as good as mandatory these days - there's no reason to argue that it isn't WC. WC is about getting the job done in a quick, economical and direct fashion, right?
My sifu was training vale tudo fighters in WC for a while and he admits that when adapted to the ring, it is cut down to about 50% of it's material. In fact, outside of tan sao, gan sao, bong sao, pak sao (i think) and chain punching, the rest is anything goes.
On the "street" (hate that term), shooting is ill advised and if someone did, sprawl and get back on your feet to end the fight or run. Of course on the street, fightin is ill advised altogether.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 04:27 PM

Well it depends on who you are talking about in when you say Ip man's time. Ip man had many students and also closed door disciples.
I know of 2 Disciples that have trained hard against Thai Fighters. They have had a great deal of success. I know of one that focused more of Law enforcement, and self defense.

Just because the 3 most famous students of Ip man didn't do something doesn't mean everyone didn't. Don't think that the perspective of Leung ting, William Cheung and Moy Yat are the only perspectives.
Most of the people who learned to apply Wing Chun, are not known to 95% of Wing Chun Practitioners. Humility is a large reason, among others.

From what I understand Ip man believed in Abstract ideas. He tailored the abstract around each person (or the ones he wanted to teach). So if you understand the abstract then you can apply it differently.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 04:35 PM

Sorry for not being clear. I guess I was referring to the post WWII rooftop fight days in HK, which really wasn't Ip Man's time - he was probably beyond that. Most of what I was referring to came from the writings of Hawkins Cheung from old issues of BB and IKF.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/07/06 05:04 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkzZZ10xd5c&search=sprawl%20
I am not a big fan of Frank. BUT what he is saying in this clip is the same thing We practice am my school for when someone is pushing hard with Chi sao. We will also pull thats te only change. This is my point.. you can use or find similar ideas everywere.
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 03:51 AM

Monji, great video

the idea behind Shamrock's clip is something so fundamental to many many MA. Though sprawling is a good technique to know, it follows this principle. Redirect the force somewhere else. So its not the techniques that the WC man or Hung Gar man or whatever man needs to know, its the principle behind the techniques. Once you unlock the principle then 10 megatrillion-thousand moves will be open to you (amount of a rough estimate). A WC man can definitely defeat a a grappling artist..he just needs to know how to move his body, redirection, and setting himself up for attacks. He doesnt necessarily have to cross train inorder to beat his opponent.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 08:53 AM

There are four lines of defense to a takedown. Sprawling is the last of them.

They are preceded by hands, elbows and head position (level change). The sprawl is after those. A competent wrestler is going to shoot only after clearing those lines of defense.

A Greco-Roman wrestler won't likely shoot at ALL, but they still do excellent takedowns.

Just trying to make a point that the sprawl is not the be-all, end-all of takedown defense. As a grappler, the LAST thing I would do to take someone down is change level and shoot from an outside position with no set-up or tie-up.

The problem that I'm seeing is that 99% of the non-wrestling crowd thinks that the shot is the only way of taking someone down.



-John
Posted by: Tezza

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 10:23 AM

Some interesting views Im glad I started this topic
Posted by: kusojiji

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 02:23 PM

Quote:

The problem that I'm seeing is that 99% of the non-wrestling crowd thinks that the shot is the only way of taking someone down.



-John



And more recently, the idea that just saying the word "sprawl" immediately makes them takedown-proof.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 05:04 PM

its a good point that shooting for the legs isn't the only way that people get taken to the ground. The same assumption can be made that MMA training is the goal for everyone. Sure saying anything doesn't make anything happen. Saying that a fighter that can't do well in MMA can't do well in a fight doesn't make it true either.

Be realistic.
the methods,goals and tactics are not the same for self-defense and MMA fighting.

I would say that Every Wing Chun fighter I have trained with trains for self-defense not MMA fighting. I don't care to argue the difference or the importance of the two. You can use common sense to figure that one out.

I follow the school of thought that mastering 5 techniques that work 90% very well, is better than learning 3 systems of martial art that claim to be the “best”.

You have to wonder who has the time to master so many techniques and arts. Sure if you are a Pro fighter thats great.. but most people aren't. I know many people who have it in their heart to train 6 hours a day 5 days a week. BUT can't because of monetary,social, medical reasons ect..

Don't think by me saying the word sprawl I am suddenly saying that someone needs to train anything other that Wing Chun. theirs a reason why Ip man never thought this subject. A good Wing Chun fighter can handle anyone, no matter the style. JMO Wing Chun isn't lacking its the practitioners who are lacking.

I stand by the idea that learning and training a good sprawl and knee for shoots. Other methods of taking someone to the ground are covered in Proper distance, timing, striking and A quality horse.
JMO
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 06:57 PM

monji112000 wrote:
Quote:

its a good point that shooting for the legs isn't the only way that people get taken to the ground. The same assumption can be made that MMA training is the goal for everyone.



It wasn't an assumption.


Quote:


Be realistic.
the methods,goals and tactics are not the same for self-defense and MMA fighting.



Why not? Why do you see MMA as just a “sport”? Why can’t it be a training paradigm as it is with Burton Richardson’s Jeet Kune Do Unlimited? They use MMA as another vehicle, so to speak, to develop their self-defense ability. Training for MMA is merely training for high performance. Wouldn’t high performance be a goal for just about anyone?


Quote:


I would say that Every Wing Chun fighter I have trained with trains for self-defense not MMA fighting. I don't care to argue the difference or the importance of the two. You can use common sense to figure that one out.




I don’t see a difference. I think common sense leads me to understand that MMA training is just training throughout all ranges. You don’t have to train for specific rules if you’re training MMA. That would be something that you’d have to bear in mind if your goal was to compete. But what about others who train but don’t compete and just do so for the development of skill? I don’t see where MMA training automatically means SPORT.


Quote:


I follow the school of thought that mastering 5 techniques that work 90% very well, is better than learning 3 systems of martial art that claim to be the “best”.



I don’t think it’s always about learning three systems. Its more like working to master one while you supplement your training in others. I just see it as learning to use all available tools and, to develop those tools at the best of one’s ability. I think those are worthy and noble goals.


Quote:


You have to wonder who has the time to master so many techniques and arts. Sure if you are a Pro fighter thats great.. but most people aren't. I know many people who have it in their heart to train 6 hours a day 5 days a week. BUT can't because of monetary,social, medical reasons ect..




You’d only need to train that long if you were a pro fighter though. You can train anywhere from 4 to 6 hours a WEEK and still get some great training in.

Perhaps you don’t fully understand what MMA is or, what it means. Its is simple a method of training where nothing it considered out of bounds. In other words, if you’re practicing striking, your partners can work to take you down and continue your training from that point. Kind of like a real fight in that there is continuous action. You learn to develop that “flow” state. It’s just good, solid training and it’s also fun as hell. At least that’s what most people think after they have been properly introduced to it.


Quote:


Don't think by me saying the word sprawl I am suddenly saying that someone needs to train anything other that Wing Chun. theirs a reason why Ip man never thought this subject. A good Wing Chun fighter can handle anyone, no matter the style. JMO Wing Chun isn't lacking its the practitioners who are lacking.




Wow! A good wing chun fighter can handle ANYONE?! That’s a mighty big statement bro. Are you sure about that?

Are you a “good wing chun fighter”? If so, can you back your words up? If you’re not a “good wing chun fighter”, do you know of anyone that IS, because I don’t. I’ve not met one yet that was worth a crap to in my opinion. Maybe there are just a lot of people are “are lacking” (to use your words).

If you can find any that aren’t lacking, send ‘em my way.


Quote:


I stand by the idea that learning and training a good sprawl and knee for shoots. Other methods of taking someone to the ground are covered in Proper distance, timing, striking and A quality horse.
JMO



Yeah, A good horse to ride like hell away on, right?

Where are you located kid? I would LOVE to train with you sometime. You speak with big, TALL words.


-John
Posted by: MattJ

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 08:34 PM

Quote by Monji -

Quote:

A good Wing Chun fighter can handle anyone, no matter the style. JMO Wing Chun isn't lacking its the practitioners who are lacking.



I am surprised to see this kind of attitude still around these days. The UFC has proven that there are no single styles that are not lacking something. Hell, even Gracie Jujitsu itself has been proven to have holes in it.

It's fine to love your style, but don't let that love blind you. MMA does not equal sport - it is a training methodology that can be applied to anything.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/08/06 11:39 PM

Uh, guys - just before anyone gets on a "WC sucks" kick, please keep in mind that there are progressive schools of it out there and we're not all out to prove that it is complete. My instructor says the same thing as my MMA instructors did - if you can't make it your own, you got nothing. WC is a toolkit, that's it. Again, it's the practitioner, not the art.
Posted by: Fisherman

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 10:15 AM

There are multiple ways to counter a shoot and there are other ways to take someone down other than the shoot. Study what it is that your opponent is doing in detail. What works as a counter to his approach? When you have figured that out, train it till it becomes yours.
Posted by: trevek

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 01:40 PM

Been posted before, but this might be of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdF1nIAfpk&search=william%20cheung%20
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 05:06 PM

Ah, GAWD! NOT THAT CLIP!!!!
I swear, if I have to see that thing one more time...

Dude, there's volumes on this fight on bullshido.com, where it belongs.
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 05:28 PM

I'm pretty sure that monji wanted to say that a real good martial artists in one art can defend himself against another person of a different martial art. Honestly if someone is good enough to win fights it doesnt mean that they necessarily train MMA. If someone is quick and strong enough to beat someone to the punch then they'll take the fight, doesnt matter what "style". Its not like its impossible for a MMAist to lose to someone who trained in only 1 art.

No art out there is ultimate traditional or MMA or otherwise. its the artists that hold the power not the art
Posted by: trevek

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 05:36 PM

hee hee hee
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 07:18 PM

as I said I don't like to debate if MMA fighting is a “real” fight.
Its a silly argument, You can logically look at both sides and see what makes sense.

Yes its a Great way to gain experience, but its not REAL. Many MMA fighters get hurt in real life and many Good MA fighters suck at MMA.
Why isn't it just a sport? Because it has rules, its a sanctioned fight in a ring between two people who have been training for some time. Self-defense isn't. Being raped can't be compared to MMA fighting. YES IT DOES A VERY GOOD JOB OF PREPARING YOU FOR ANY ASPECT OF FIGHTING. BUT its not a good test of a fighter.
Krav Maga is a perfect example of what I am talking about. It works very well ( I have seen it first hand in ISREAL). BUT its not that good for MMA. Any person who does Krav and goes into MMA normally traines wrestling and Thi boxing.
MMA fighting is training for a tournament. Preparing for a situation of being mugged isn't the same. I could go into it all day. You would say it is.. and that fine but I must disagree. Its great training but don't think you are prepared for self-defense.
Why is it a sport? Because IT HAS RULES! It is “safe”. Thats why people do MMA Because the not many people die. Thats what makes it so wonderful, I can use it to gain experience without getting too hurt or hurting my opponent that much.
Go out of black and white , I am not saying that MMA isn't useful.
Please don't challenge me. I don't fight for fun and I don't fight fare. You are welcome to train with me on friendly basis. I respect all arts and fighters. I am only asking you to be realistic, stop thinking your style (MMA) is better then everyone elses. Better is relative , What makes something Good is relative, and what makes something a “sport” is relative also.
am I a good fighter NO.
I don't have the timing or the reaction yet.
Sorry.
No I don't really speak with Big words, I am just being honest. Just Because I have faith in my style doesn't make em cocky.
Yes Gracie JJ has been “proven” in the UFC but UFC isn't a 100% representation of a fight. Its a good way to gain experience though.
Yah I have seen the William Cheung fight with Boztepeze. Both fighters really.. arn't much to talk about.
All I said was that MMA doesn't mean you are a good fighter or that you can defend yourself given a real situation.
I don't claim to have the perfect style or to be the perfect fighter. I am simply saying that Its the fighter not the style. A good Wing Chun fighter should be able to hand any situation. Just like a good Thai fighter or BJJ fighter. You are just looking to bash Traditional Martial arts Because they don't bow down to MMA and say YOU ARE THE BEST MMA FIGHTERS YOU CAN BEAT ANYONE ANYWERE ANYTIME. Its simply not true. Don't think it is. MMA fighter is clueless when a gun is pointed at them or when they are being raped.

Its impossible to talk about ground fighting without this stupid argument over and over again. Arn't you tired of replaying it? YES NO WING CHUN fighter has really done well in MMA. Its going to stay that way. Thai fighters are probably the “best” fighters, and they don't really do that well.

the funny thing is I have always said cross train, but don't fool yourself by saying that everything is equal.
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 08:19 PM

monji112000 wrote
Quote:

as I said I don't like to debate if MMA fighting is a “real” fight.
Its a silly argument, You can logically look at both sides and see what makes sense.



You’re absolutely right. It most definitely is a real fight. I mean, how could anyone not agree?


Quote:


Yes its a Great way to gain experience, but its not REAL.




It’s not real in what way?

As far as I’m concerned, it’s real. Lets see:

*Both fighters are trying to knock each other out (among other things).
*Both fighters are resisting each other 100 percent.

Yep, seems real to ME. What’s not real about it? That they aren’t using weapons? Doesn’t make it any less real! They are still trying to hurt each other, and as long as that’s the case, it’s real bro. Deal with that. No it isn’t a street fight, but its not “fake” either if you see my point.

I realize we’re talking semantics. But you need to understand that those cage fights are “point sparring” contests.



Quote:


Why isn't it just a sport? Because it has rules, its a sanctioned fight in a ring between two people who have been training for some time.



MMA is just an form of training man. “IT” doesn’t have rules. The UFC has rules. Pride has rules. MMA doesn’t. It’s just training. That’s the point I’m trying to make (and that others have made). Try to see that please. That’s all I will ask of you.


Quote:


Self-defense isn't. Being raped can't be compared to MMA fighting.



No one is doubting that, lol! That’s for certain. But I don’t know if anyone is really making that claim either. Certainly not myself.



Quote:


YES IT DOES A VERY GOOD JOB OF PREPARING YOU FOR ANY ASPECT OF FIGHTING. BUT its not a good test of a fighter.




I have to disagree. I think that MMA style sparring/fighting is perhaps the best sort of test there is because it allows you to understand and face the “pressure” of real fighting. The intensity is what makes it so real. And it’s that intensity that is the doing-in of most martial artists. Most folks never even come CLOSE to having to deal with that level of intensity within their training environments.

Just wrestle around at 100 percent for about two minutes. A great majority of people (without the grappling background) will be completely gassed and have no idea how to deal with it. That fact ALONE is an adequate test of a fighters capacity.

Bottom line is; without immersing yourself within that adrenaline-laced environment against your peers (people of your own skill level or above), you will never adequately test yourself. You have to get as close to the edge as possible and there is no better or safer way than MMA. Period.

What in your opinion, is a BETTER test?


Quote:


Krav Maga is a perfect example of what I am talking about. It works very well ( I have seen it first hand in ISREAL). BUT its not that good for MMA. Any person who does Krav and goes into MMA normally trains wrestling and Thi boxing.



Krav Maga is the latest, flavor of the month. Just another “style” in a long line of “combative” styles - no better or worse than anything else.

Right now KM is making a lot of people a lot of money. That alone is enough to question it. Besides, you’re not even guaranteed the chance to spar in every KM session. You’re often just learning more “techniques” against compliant resistance.

Its no WONDER KM guys would have to go outside of their style to learn and train effectly for competing within MMA.


Quote:


MMA fighting is training for a tournament.



You’re starting your whole argument from a false premise. Do you know what that means? It means that everything that follows will be false as well. You should bother to do your research before coming here to debate a point.


Quote:


Preparing for a situation of being mugged isn't the same. I could go into it all day. You would say it is.. and that fine but I must disagree. Its great training but don't think you are prepared for self-defense.
Why is it a sport? Because IT HAS RULES!




Once again (please slow down, read, and contemplate what is being said):

MMA is just training. The UFC has rules. Pride has rules. MMA is not an event. It is a training vehicle. OK? This is the last post in which I will debate with you if you don’t get it now. Take the time. Ask questions. Just don’t be so biased that it blinds you.



Quote:

That’s why people do MMA Because the not many people die. That’s what makes it so wonderful, I can use it to gain experience without getting too hurt or hurting my opponent that much.
Go out of black and white , I am not saying that MMA isn't useful.




I understand YOUR point, but you don’t understand mine. Please make the effort to do so.

Quote:


Please don't challenge me. I don't fight for fun and I don't fight fare. You are welcome to train with me on friendly basis.




No one is challenging you to “death match” kid. I’m merely offering to challenge your beliefs and paradigms.




Quote:


I respect all arts and fighters. I am only asking you to be realistic, stop thinking your style (MMA) is better then everyone else’s. Better is relative , What makes something Good is relative, and what makes something a “sport” is relative also. Am I a good fighter NO. I don't have the timing or the reaction yet.




Stop being paranoid. I’m not after you to hurt you. I’m making the offer of training and friendly sparring. No one has to get hurt. No one has to do anything they don’t want to do. We’re not talking about putting people into hospitals. It’s about “play” and trials by fire. The offer stands. I just think you need to get around a little more than you have. You’ve got some learning to do.



Quote:


No I don't really speak with Big words, I am just being honest. Just Because I have faith in my style doesn't make em cocky.




You’d better have some faith in yourself than in your style bro. Your “style” isn’t going to do your fighting for you.


Quote:


Yes Gracie JJ has been “proven” in the UFC but UFC isn't a 100% representation of a fight.




It’s been proven in fights, both in the cage and the street. Many times, many places and by many people.


Quote:


Yah I have seen the William Cheung fight with Boztepeze. Both fighters really.. arn't much to talk about.
All I said was that MMA doesn't mean you are a good fighter or that you can defend yourself given a real situation.




It’s subjective and relative. I’d say that if you’re a good fighter, then you’re a good fighter. It’s all about the ability to perform. Do you not think that Andrei Arlovski could defend himself on the street against a drunk? What about Matt Hughes or Georges St. Pierre? Do you know what their backgrounds are? What did you think, that they just came in from recess period? Those guys have been MARTIAL ARTISTS!

What do you think the three letters, MMA means? It means, Mixed Martial Arts. What does that tell you?


Quote:


I don't claim to have the perfect style or to be the perfect fighter. I am simply saying that Its the fighter not the style.



You seem to be saying the exact opposite many times.


Quote:


A good Wing Chun fighter should be able to hand any situation. Just like a good Thai fighter or BJJ fighter. You are just looking to bash Traditional Martial arts Because they don't bow down to MMA and say YOU ARE THE BEST MMA FIGHTERS YOU CAN BEAT ANYONE ANYWERE ANYTIME.




Dude, take-a-freakin'-powder and relax. MMA fighters don’t even beat each OTHER all the time so, how can they beat anyone, anytime, anywhere? MMA isn’t style junior, it’s the way you train. And for the last time, that doesn’t have JACK SH*T to do with rules.


Quote:


MMA fighter is clueless when a gun is pointed at them or when they are being raped.




Would you mind telling me what OTHER martial arts stylist wouldn’t be clueless when having a gun pointed at their head?

I also doubt that you’re going to see Tim Sylvia being raped anytime soon. Geezuz, his own WIFE probably wouldn’t do that, lol.

But you’re missing the point. In fact, you’re probably still in high school and are so horned-up that you can’t think straight anyway. Let me know if I’m off base.


Quote:


Its impossible to talk about ground fighting without this stupid argument over and over again.





You know something? You’re damned RIGHT about that. And you know what else? That isn’t MY damned fault at all. I’ve done MY time here bro, doing my damnedest to try and shed some light on this whole freaking sport vs. street issue. You’re right, it IS a dead argument that, YOU STILL DON’T GET.


Quote:


Arn't you tired of replaying it?




Does the expression “HELL NO” mean anything to you? I’ve been here for over three years and I’ve not tired yet. I’m even less tired than I used to be because I don’t really give a rats ass if you people get it anymore or not. I know the truth and the other intelligent folks I talk with here, and with whom I train, DO as well. That’s all that matters to me.






Quote:


YES NO WING CHUN fighter has really done well in MMA. Its going to stay that way.




And do you know why that is? I can tell you right here: An often profound LACK of “functional” training.



Quote:

Thai fighters are probably the “best” fighters, and they don't really do that well.




Wow! The best fighters and they don’t do that well. Go ponder THAT logic. The better fighters don’t do well. Is that Zen riddle or something? I can’t figure that one out for the life of me.

Listen kid, the “best” fighters are the ones who can perform the best. Performance ability, is performance ability, regardless of “where” it happens to be. If a person is not winning much, its because he cannot perform well. Don’t accept any other bullsh*t excuses.




-John
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/09/06 10:29 PM

Quote:

Firstly I am not trying to make a flame war I am just trying to get a WC/WT view on it and also to start a new thread of interest. I have trained in this area, although I would like to hear your views on it.
So with all that talk on WT/WC vs. MMA, what do you think is the best way to respond to a wrestling or shoot fighting attack from a wing chun perspective?



Boy has this gone in the wrong direction already.
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 01:44 AM

geez yes it is shikata

I would have to agree and disagree with some of the things said up there, I'll just talk off the top of my head.

is MMA sports a good test of being in a real fight? Yea I would say so, though I mean the rules that are set by UFC, Pride, etc. limit the techniques ever so slightly. And that BJJ and Muay Thai have a wierd advantage in the cage. But besides that it is a good way to prepare you for self defense in the street. You build up reaction time and your body's capabilities (speed, strength, what not).

And just because traditional arts dont hold well in MMA competitions doesnt mean that they dont hold well in reality. In a fight there must always be a winner and loser, but that doesnt mean the loser sucks. I mean Royce Gracie lost to Matt Hughes, but I'm sure Gracie and his BJJ doesnt suck. You cant always just say "hey the winner has a better style." No simply he was the better fighter of the two. You cant compare him to other people he hasnt faced. So a WC man loses to a MMAist. He loses to the individual who trained and practiced the MMA, he didnt necessarily lose to MMA. I'm sure the WC man can find a MMAist out there in this big world of ours that he can defeat in a fight. Same could be said about a Shaolin man, Karate man, Capoeira man, whatever man against another styled guy.

Why do traditionalists lose to MMA or BJJ or Muay Thai or whatever guys?? Well they simply didnt train properly and hard enough to prepare themselves for all aspects of a fight. Too much one dimensionalism. Like a Boxer, he should definitely practice hand offense and defense, as those are his weapons, but he should also know that there are people out there who kick and grab and throw. So he should prepare himself to block and counter those attacks. Doesnt mean hes crosstrained or went into the path of MMA, just simply hes expanding his boundaries of Boxing. Taking the principles of Boxing and applying them to other things besides punches.

whew, that was long
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 02:28 AM

Right! Once AGAIN, peeps - toolkits. Our skills are our TOOLKITS. Use a wrench to take a nut off. Use a spanner to remove a lockring. Use a hammer to pound a nail. It's up to you to recognize the obstacle and choose the right tool to best deal with it. Any MA worth it's salt does nothing more than give you the tools. Everything else is up to you.
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 02:51 AM

i guess thats a good way to sum it up skikata
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 07:36 AM

IExcalibui2 wrote
Quote:

I would have to agree and disagree with some of the things said up there, I'll just talk off the top of my head.




Don't do that. This is just getting good. Tell us WHAT you disagree with.

Quote:


is MMA sports a good test of being in a real fight? Yea I would say so, though I mean the rules that are set by UFC, Pride, etc. limit the techniques ever so slightly.




That’s for sure. The thing to understand is that the rules are the SAME FOR EVERYONE, BJJ guys, muay Thai guys, boxers, wrestlers and everyone else. They all have to abide by the rules. BJJ guys can’t fight dirty, big deal. No one can.


Quote:


And that BJJ and Muay Thai have a wierd advantage in the cage. But besides that it is a good way to prepare you for self defense in the street.




Isn’t that a strange thing to say? Have you bothered to ask yourself WHY that is? Really, think about that. WHY is it that those artists tend to stand out? Functional training. Train functionally and you’ll perform well. Don’t and you won’t. I mean, you’ll NEVER see wing chun compound trapping in the UFC. One reason is because of how it’s often trained.

Now go back to what I said in the previous paragraph about how even the BJJ and muay Thai guys have to play by the rules as well? Now, just imagine if they didn’t for a second. You’d have even MORE of an advantage. Let the BJJ be able to gouge, tear, rip, go for the eyes, bite like a piranha and everything else. That isn’t an animal that you want to face. Same goes for a functional muay Thai guy.

Lets leave the bullsh*t (talk of foul tactics) where it needs to say and talk about the performance ability. That matters more than anything. If you cannot perform in one environment, you’re not going to magically be able to in another, just because the “rules are different”. I think that’s fairly important to understand.

And yes, this completely relevant to the thread topic. Just in round a bout sort of way, lol.



Quote:


And just because traditional arts dont hold well in MMA competitions doesnt mean that they dont hold well in reality. In a fight there must always be a winner and loser, but that doesnt mean the loser sucks. I mean Royce Gracie lost to Matt Hughes, but I'm sure Gracie and his BJJ doesnt suck.



Everything is relative. And you’re right, Royce Gracie’s BJJ doesn’t suck at all. In fact, that’s exactly what Hughes was using to beat Gracie with. I don’t know if you realized that or not, but I did. And so did everyone that has been training in BJJ longer than a week. Hughes used a textbook BJJ attack to defeat Gracie. Lets give credit where it’s due.


Quote:


You cant always just say "hey the winner has a better style." No simply he was the better fighter of the two.




I agree with that. But it DOES comes down to how functional one’s training is. Stand there and train kata all day long and I don’t care if you train for a hundred YEARS, you’re not going to do well in a fight against other worthy competitors whose training is more functional and who see more resistive sparring in their training. It’s science and common sense, not myth and fantasy.


Quote:


So a WC man loses to a MMAist. He loses to the individual who trained and practiced the MMA, he didnt necessarily lose to MMA. I'm sure the WC man can find a MMAist out there in this big world of ours that he can defeat in a fight.




Of COURSE he didn’t lose to MMA. MMA isn’t a “style”. I only think that’s been said about a thousand times now. The reason many (not all) MMA guys are so capable is because of the way they train. They don’t do kata, hit wooden dummies or whatever. They’re training with resistance. They’re training with partners. They're constantly working to improve their conditioning, etc. They are using sound, scientific training principles.

I always say the same thing with regard for that argument; the UFC has been in existence for 13 years now. There has been PLENTY of time now for a guy to come forward and claim to be a wing chun guy and win some fights. Boztepe even once claimed that he wasn’t going to fight. He never did as have none of his students. How much longer do we have to wait for that day to come?

You hear everyone saying the same things: “Wing Chun guys train for the STREET, not sport. In the street, there are no rules and they’ll take your HEADS off there” – all while not realizing that at least it’s safe in the cage. In the street, the inability to perform only means that their beatdowns are going to be more costly.

Listen, I’m not saying that there aren’t any functional wing chun guys. I do question their training and, I wonder why so many years have to pass before any of those guys can claim to have won any MMA fights. It’s open to everyone. Perhaps some even have that have had WC backgrounds and only failed to mention that. One thing is for certain; you don’t see any WC technique.


Quote:


Why do traditionalists lose to MMA or BJJ or Muay Thai or whatever guys?? Well they simply didnt train properly and hard enough to prepare themselves for all aspects of a fight.




My point exactly. Lack of functional training is ALWAYS the culprit.


Quote:


Too much one dimensionalism. Like a Boxer, he should definitely practice hand offense and defense, as those are his weapons, but he should also know that there are people out there who kick and grab and throw. So he should prepare himself to block and counter those attacks. Doesnt mean hes crosstrained or went into the path of MMA





Like cross-training is a “bad thing”. Ooooh, don’t tell anyone you … CROSS-TRAINED”, lol God forbid that anyone should training using an MMA approach, right?

DAMN THOSE SPORT GUYS!!!


Quote:

just simply hes expanding his boundaries of Boxing. Taking the principles of Boxing and applying them to other things besides punches.




Which is just common sense. To hell with styles. Focus on intelligent training. That well only serve you better in the end.



Quote:


whew, that was long





No it wasn’t. Trust me on that.




-John
Posted by: SLW

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 08:07 AM

Quote:

Been posted before, but this might be of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdF1nIAfpk&search=william%20cheung%20



I was always curious about what Yip Man would do in order to defeat a wrestler in that situation. Don't think I'll get the chance to ask him since he has passed on a long time ago.
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 12:41 PM

Aren't you tired of having the same argument? I am.. thats why I try not to talk about MMA or ground fighting (most of the time).

So lets agree to disagree, You believe MMA is a REAL fight. completely determining the skill and ability for anyone to defend themselves. I believe is a wonderful SPORT, that teaches timing, reaction and many other skills that are essential to defending yourself. I have stated before and I will briefly state again why I feel this way. Rules, RING, preparation, 1 vs 1 , equipment. Also the strategy involved in MMA fighting isn't 100% applicable to the street. Many fights in UFC and other MMA events end with the top opponent winning. Maybe by submission maybe by GnP. People do stand up, but its not a goal. You don't get points for being able to stand back up. The ground isn't a safe position to be, so I personally find most submissions and GnP tactics unrealistic. Sure its likely that someone will GnP you, but I would never train in that strategy.

Again I have taken the middle road, yet you stay hell bent on bring things to extremes. I will agree to disagree.

This started at the sprawl is very useful technique for self-defense. I mentioned that It can be incorporated into someone Wing Chun “tool-kit”. Its not perfect for MMA, but its just about for the most cases.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 01:08 PM

Quote:

This started at the sprawl is very useful technique for self-defense. I mentioned that It can be incorporated into someone Wing Chun “tool-kit”. Its not perfect for MMA, but its just about for the most cases.



Didn't I mention that? Maybe I'm crazy, I don't know - doesn't matter, it was said and it's pretty true.

However, I gotta back JKogas up on the fact that you're missing his point. Again, MMA is a training methodology, not a style or a set way of fighting. People incorporate techniques into MMA all the time, probably even ideas from
WC or JKD (which isn't a style either). The bottom line is that MMA has you doing chinese pushups, jacknifes, sprawls on the floor, weight training, shooting while strapped to the wall by your arms with rubber cords, etc. etc.
MOST TMA schools do not use this kind of training and their students suffer from lack of strength, agility, cardio flexibility whatever. Until you get SO GOOD at WC that you can use without thinking, you need to train yourself for performance. That's all he's saying, period. If you don't want to train hard like that, fine. I do. I also meditate and play chi sao. Just think of it this way - if WC or any other art is your toolkit, MMA training is a great way to sharpen those tools. There really is no argument there. Besides, training is much more fun when you can go full bore and not get winded after 2 minutes
Posted by: MattJ

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 03:50 PM

Monji -

Quote:

You believe MMA is a REAL fight. completely determining the skill and ability for anyone to defend themselves. I believe is a wonderful SPORT





Did you actually read anything that JKogas wrote? MMA is not just sport - it is a training methodology that can be applied to anything. Including the vaunted foul tactics. You seem to be fixated on the UFC and MMA competition, but you can train MMA for self defense just as easily. What makes you think that MMA people wouldn't pull out the throat shots and eye boinks if push came to shove?

Really under-estimating here. It is not "taking the middle road" when you are INCORRECTLY attempting to put MMA people in a box.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 04:13 PM

Yeah, especially because they come in an octagon!
Posted by: MattJ

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 04:38 PM

Quote:

Yeah, especially because they come in an octagon!



LMAO!!
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 05:01 PM

Quote:

Did you actually read anything that JKogas wrote?


Yes all of it
Quote:

MMA is not just sport - it is a training methodology that can be applied to anything.


well yes and no. That really depends on what you consider MMA and how you are applying it. If you are talking about using what works and training logically and effectively. Sure but thats not MMA, thats common sense.
Quote:

You seem to be fixated on the UFC and MMA competition, but you can train MMA for self defense just as easily.


well again thats true if you add self defense styles to your mix, not if you use MMA geared for Tournament fighting. See really it still comes down to the basic concept that we Disagree with. I read all the comments and I understand were you are coming from. if you are going to start talking about Mixing styles like Krav or something similar then sure MMA is great for self-defense.
Quote:

Really under-estimating here. It is not "taking the middle road" when you are INCORRECTLY attempting to put MMA people in a box


well they are two different topics.
I will define MMA in general the way most MMA fighters define it. The General public and Most magazines and MMA "fighters" define it by the rules of Pride,UFC,IFL ect..
Thats fine with me, I love MMA. I have enjoyed watching Pride/UFC for a long time. I am very happy about IFL.

I am in the middle, because at one end you have people who believe in only 1 style. Which I understand their logic, and it makes sense. On the other side you have people who believe in training as many styles as they can learn effectively. I also follow their logic, I am in the middle. I train at a traditional school, were 1 style is pushed at a very intense training regimen. But, when I have some free time I plan to start another style. But, really only as a compliment not as a equal. So really I am in the middle.

Again if you define MMA not as UFC/PRIDE style of fighting, then its PERFECT for self-defense. But that can be said about ANY style including traditional styles. For example a Karate player can be just as effective as a MMA fighter if you apply the same training methodology. You don't per say need to MIX styles to be "effective". Thats another point that we Disagree on, but again I understand both sides. I believe strongly is hard training. Training using real speed and real strength. I believe strongly is cardio and weight lifting. I do hard sparring on a normal basis. I have and use my heavy bag, speed bag, jump rope ect.. At my school we train for muscle memory so we are constantly doing fighting drills. I am constantly sparring with other styles like Muy thai and boxing. Sure I don't always do so hot, but I always give people a run for their money . I view it as a learning experience.

Maybe I don't come from a "normal" traditional martial art school.. but then you are putting traditional martial arts in a box.

Again you can train in a traditional martial art and use effective, scientific training. Its not Mixing if you train effectively. Its just common sense. Really This has been done since Ip man, and its a normal in my style.

I don't train in william chung/leung ting/ moy yat/Boztepe/Fung or probably any other Wing chun teacher you have heard of. Its the people you don't hear about that you always have to worry about.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 05:14 PM


Waiting for this thread to return to topic...
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 05:45 PM

geez its like a never ending circle...

I would simply say, look at the replies that Jkogas gave up there in response to my comments. He does say that theres nothing wrong with practicing 1 "style" its the training that they lack in. So with that said, all the MMA and WC comparisons and such shouldn't be relevent. I mean I'm sure a great amount of us here agree that style has nothing to do with fighting capability. A capoeirista can just as easily knock out a TKDist like a wrestler to a Judoka.

And though I understand where you're coming from, sport doesnt mean the end of all self-defense and fighting. I'm sure some WTF TKD guys out there can give you a pretty tough fight if you tried to rob him of his wallet. And I would say competition will give you quite an accurate simulation of what will happen on the street. Ok so you're avg joe might not be able to do lap sao or kimora locks but still they will fight hard and fast, using up lots of energy. And I'm sure you will too and so it appears that these "combat" sports, like MMA and TKD and Judo and whatever you want to add helps to function better under stress.

And yea I'll juss add again MMA doesnt = sport. I'm sure there are MMA guys out there who don't train to fight for the UFC but for their own defense. And TMA works just as well as "MMA" does. Its not the style, its how they train. And I cant remember what else I wanted to say....

And yea I know that wasn't long John, but for me?? hahaha
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 06:33 PM

monji112000 wrote
Quote:

MMA is not just sport - it is a training methodology that can be applied to anything.


…………..well yes and no. That really depends on what you consider MMA and how you are applying it. If you are talking about using what works and training logically and effectively. Sure but that’s not MMA, that’s common sense.




Not exactly. That’s part of it, but not all of it. It is also training three ranges simultaneously in an integrated manner.


Quote:

You seem to be fixated on the UFC and MMA competition, but you can train MMA for self defense just as easily.

………………..well again that’s true if you add self defense styles to your mix, not if you use MMA geared for Tournament fighting.




Then please explain what the difference is? What is (in your opinion) the difference between tournament “styles” and self-defense “styles”?



Quote:


See really it still comes down to the basic concept that we Disagree with. I read all the comments and I understand were you are coming from. if you are going to start talking about Mixing styles like Krav or something similar then sure MMA is great for self-defense.




Its really important here to understand that a punch is a punch is a punch, regardless of what “style” it comes from. Some are performed better than others. What’s the difference between a Krav Maga punch and an “MMA” punch? Considering that Km draws from many of the same sources that MMA draws from, how CAN there be a difference? I’d like your take on that.


Quote:

Really under-estimating here. It is not "taking the middle road" when you are INCORRECTLY attempting to put MMA people in a box


……………………well they are two different topics. I will define MMA in general the way most MMA fighters define it. The General public and Most magazines and MMA "fighters" define it by the rules of Pride,UFC,IFL ect.. That’s fine with me, I love MMA. I have enjoyed watching Pride/UFC for a long time. I am very happy about IFL.




You see, that’s how YOU define MMA. That’s as well and good, but I have a another definition of what MMA is. It isn’t based on rules. No one that trains with me trains for competition. So where again do these rules come into play, especially for folks like us?


Quote:


I am in the middle, because at one end you have people who believe in only 1 style. Which I understand their logic, and it makes sense. On the other side you have people who believe in training as many styles as they can learn effectively. I also follow their logic, I am in the middle. I train at a traditional school, were 1 style is pushed at a very intense training regimen. But, when I have some free time I plan to start another style. But, really only as a compliment not as a equal. So really I am in the middle.




MMA isn’t about style. It isn’t style specific. It borrows from styles and utilizes any tool that it needs to meet it’s demands. But it isn’t limited to a specific skill-set or toolbox. You can use whatever you can get to “work”.



Quote:


Again if you define MMA not as UFC/PRIDE style of fighting, then its PERFECT for self-defense. But that can be said about ANY style including traditional styles. For example a Karate player can be just as effective as a MMA fighter if you apply the same training methodology.




I’ve been saying the same thing for years. I’ve said as much in this thread.

MMA isn’t about style. It’s about HOW you train and not WHAT you train. But to train to be functional, you’re going to have to train functionally. That will mean dropping a LOT of things that tend to “define” more traditional martial arts.



Quote:


You don't per say need to MIX styles to be "effective". That’s another point that we Disagree on, but again I understand both sides.



MMA isn’t so much about mixing styles, again because there ultimately ARE no such things as “styles”. It’s about mixing striking and grappling. It’s about allowing two distinct approaches to be “mixed” together. That isn’t often the case within most martial arts practices, or, at least it wasn’t the case until the UFC rolled around. All of a sudden, the sprawl was in EVERY TMA curriculum where before, you’d rarely ever heard anyone even mention it, unless the folks talking were former wrestlers.



Quote:


Maybe I don't come from a "normal" traditional martial art school.. but then you are putting traditional martial arts in a box.




I’m defending MMA. I’ve been defending combat sports from morons for years. That anti “sport”
thinking is changing very slowly. A lot more get it now than used to however.

We’re ALL guilty at times of lumping people into a box. The only thing that I’m saying is that, if you don’t train a certain way, you’re not going to maximize your efforts. I understand that not everyone desires to be pro-fighter. But the thing is, you don’t have to be a pro fighter to train “like” one. Not everyone has the time to train 6 to 8 hours a day. The good part is, you don’t have to in order to train functionally. All that matters is that your training no be compartmentalized (a separated segment of striking and another one of grappling - or, only one such approach and none of the other).

Fights don’t happen in compartmentalized, fragmented manners. Real fights include both striking and grappling. MMA training is simply taking that same approach in order to create fighters capable of “going with the flow”.

Common sense would tell you that’s a good thing. For the LIFE of me, I just can’t understand why people want to argue against something so logical. Yet they - and YOU - continue to do so with amazing consistency.


Quote:


Again you can train in a traditional martial art and use effective, scientific training. Its not Mixing if you train effectively. Its just common sense. Really This has been done since Ip man, and its a normal in my style.



Don’t you mean, “YIP” man? In any case, if your training is alive and includes every range available, it’s going to look like MMA regardless of what you want to “name” it.



IExcalibui2 wrote

Quote:

geez its like a never ending circle...

I would simply say, look at the replies that Jkogas gave up there in response to my comments. He does say that there’s nothing wrong with practicing 1 "style" its the training that they lack in. So with that said, all the MMA and WC comparisons and such shouldn't be relevant. I mean I'm sure a great amount of us here agree that style has nothing to do with fighting capability. A capoeirista can just as easily knock out a TKDist like a wrestler to a Judoka.




Lets not get carried away here, lol. Sure, anything can happen. But again, it comes down to functional training. I’ve not seen a lot of functional training within Capoeira. I’ve not seen it in a LOT of it within TKD. I HAVE seen it in boxing, wrestling, judo, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, sombo, catch-as-catch-can, and muay Thai. Some savate I have seen is awesome. Obviously it really depends on the group or school in question.



Quote:


And yea I'll just add again MMA doesn’t = sport. I'm sure there are MMA guys out there who don't train to fight for the UFC but for their own defense.



Absolutely! What many people don’t realize is that we’re not an MMA gym (in that I don’t have a competition team - at least for the time being). I’ve been a long-time JKD guy and use the MMA approach as a training tool. That’s nothing but absorbing what is useful. MMA is extremely useful.


Quote:


And TMA works just as well as "MMA" does. Its not the style, its how they train. And I cant remember what else I wanted to say.…




Yes, HOW one trains is more important than anything. However, TMA and MMA train differently or they wouldn’t have such distinct differences. Otherwise it would ALL be MMA wouldn’t it? You need to also realize that for the most part, there are very concrete things that make TMA, TMA! It is “traditional” for a reason.




-John
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/10/06 10:39 PM

well John if a capoerista trains functionally wouldnt he be able to defend himself?? Yea alot of groups (not just limited to capoeira) dont train functionally but hey, thats where the individual kicks in and does something about it.

And I know TMA do have different and certain training methods. But they do have very basic underlying principles that they follow. I mean a Southern Mantis principle maybe different from an Arnis one but still they have their principles. So you have these principles and like I said earlier on you can apply them to every situation you're presented.

This is where people have to think out of the box and create more techniques if you will to add to the art's arsenal. Now say a WC man takes these principles and apply them to the ground fight then wouldnt he have made something thats "Wing Chun" styled grappling?? I mean there are only so many ways (actually theres a lot, but there is a limit) the body can be manipulated. So there are bound to be techniques that are the same or very similar to techinques in other arts. But back to the WC grappling. I mean if he created it without outside influence then wouldn't it be still considered a TMA??

Yes TMA means training in a traditional manner but its not like its never been battle tested before. And to say that JuJutsu isnt a TMA is kind of wierd to me since its essentially been in the Japanese MA world for centuries. Whether or not it formally had a name and organization doesnt mean it didnt exist before. I would say many many MA out there (maybe in the high 90 percentile?) are traditional. Muay Thai is a very traditional thing and has very deep roots in the religion and culture of the Thai people and has been around for thousands of years. Seems pretty traditional to me, whether it is to foreigners and the western world is a different story.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/11/06 02:33 AM

Dang. STILL waiting for thread to return to subject....
Posted by: JKogas

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/11/06 07:34 AM

Quote:

well John if a capoerista trains functionally wouldnt he be able to defend himself??




Certainly! BUT, it would probably stop looking like Capoeira if he did. It would start looking more like MMA. Would it then cease to be Capoeira? That’s the question. Another question would be, who CARES what its called or “looks like”, when functional training is all that matters. This is what Bruce Lee meant when he said he didn’t believe in styles and, only believed in one style - the “human style”.

Styles, schmyles.


Quote:


Yea alot of groups (not just limited to capoeira) dont train functionally but hey, thats where the individual kicks in and does something about it.



It doesn’t take a style to kick well. It just takes kicking. Kicking isn’t owned by any one style and many styles share the same kicks. I mean, there ARE only so many ways to kick someone if you really think about it. What matters then is how those kicks are trained. Doing cartwheels is, IMO, not the most effective method of fighting someone. That is a stylistic, ritualistic, method of practice. If we were to just drop everything that is done for sake of art and focus only on tool development, we would all likely develop as functional fighters at a quicker pace.


Quote:


And I know TMA do have different and certain training methods. But they do have very basic underlying principles that they follow. I mean a Southern Mantis principle maybe different from an Arnis one but still they have their principles. So you have these principles and like I said earlier on you can apply them to every situation you're presented.




MY question is, why have all these various principles when (at last count) the MAJORITY of us have only two arms and two legs? I mean sure, some of the lucky one’s have an three arms or legs, but for the most part this is true. If that’s so, why the need for umpteen thousand different martial arts styles? Lets just train, ya know?! Throw out what isn’t needed. You’ll often find that 90 percent of a martial arts practice is wasted time. Why? Ritualistic, out-dated training methods that really don’t do anything to create functional ability.

You could develop more skill at a faster pace by dropping all the stuff you don’t need! IMO, most people are interested in developing as quickly as possible. It’d be hard to find someone that said; “Ah, no thanks. I’m really more interested in having things be as difficult as possible. I prefer taking a slower, more indirect route and taking as long as possible to develop”. This is exactly what happens in many places (certainly not all, to be sure).


Quote:


This is where people have to think out of the box and create more techniques if you will to add to the art's arsenal. Now say a WC man takes these principles and apply them to the ground fight then wouldnt he have made something thats "Wing Chun" styled grappling?? I mean there are only so many ways (actually theres a lot, but there is a limit) the body can be manipulated. So there are bound to be techniques that are the same or very similar to techinques in other arts. But back to the WC grappling. I mean if he created it without outside influence then wouldn't it be still considered a TMA??




The question is, WHY would he need to call it “wing chun grappling”, unless you just happen to like the name wing chun. I have guys practice a jik chun choie from the top guard position or the mount position, but it isn’t wing chun.


It would be TMA if you practice your three forms, your wooden dummy form and your butterfly knives, etc. It would be TMA if you had all the rituals and trappings of the traditional form.

What does traditional mean? Can you have NON traditional wing chun? I don’t see why not! But what’s in a name? It becomes an argument over semantics.

It’s really interesting because, I don’t practice the Wing Chun limb trapping methods but I still use trapping non the less. The methods we use come from a Greco-Roman wrestling approach. Do they still serve the same function? Of course! The objective of trapping hands is to remove or obstruct a limb. Does that happen? Sure it does, and even more effectively IMO. So why aren’t we doing Wing Chun? Because of several factors:

1. We don’t wear a uniform
2. We don’t stand pigeon-toed and do the three forms
3. We don’t work the wooden dummy, etc

TMA really has more to do with forms/kata practice than anything else. You’re talking about an often very fine line that separates TMA from non TMA. Changing a few things around, training more alive, dropping kata for more sparring, etc and you’re doing more non TMA. The difference isn’t much but it’s significant none the less.


Quote:


Yes TMA means training in a traditional manner but its not like its never been battle tested before. And to say that JuJutsu isnt a TMA is kind of wierd to me since its essentially been in the Japanese MA world for centuries.



Again, it’s not much that separates TMA from NON TMA. If you like your forms and rituals, fine. That is what works for YOU. Continue to do that and whatever else makes you happy.

I’m not saying that you can’t become functional through TMA. I just believe that you can become so much faster and, improve to higher levels by dropping the unnecessary stuff from your training. Forms and kata are NOT going to make you a better fighter, regardless of what people tell you. They will tell you ANYTHING.

As far as jiu-jitsu, and specifically Brazilian jiu-jitsu coming from a traditional martial art - I agree! But it doesn’t look ANYTHING like the traditional arts that it comes from anymore. To go into a traditional Japanese jiu-jitsu school and a Brazilian jiu-jitsu school would appear like two completely different worlds - in spite of using nearly identical techniques. So whats the difference? BJJ guys become better at a faster rate than their JJJ counterparts because the methods of training are more functional.

That’s exactly my point here, and is what I’ve been saying for years.


Quote:


Whether or not it formally had a name and organization doesnt mean it didnt exist before. I would say many many MA out there (maybe in the high 90 percentile?) are traditional. Muay Thai is a very traditional thing and has very deep roots in the religion and culture of the Thai people and has been around for thousands of years. Seems pretty traditional to me, whether it is to foreigners and the western world is a different story.




Sure those arts come from a traditional background, but the difference is HOW they train.


Traditional is just a word. Lets not get too caught up in that. You can have traditional MMA. The difference is in how you go about your training.


....now, where were we?



ShikataGaNai - I believe we're not on topic because the topic that's changed is simply a better one.

Things happen. Perhaps if people ask more questions relating to the original topic, they might get answered. Right now there is at least some good conversation going on.


-John
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/11/06 09:46 AM

ShikataGaNai - I believe we're not on topic because the topic that's changed is simply a better one.

It is a good topic, but it's been covered and seriously some people are never gonna get it. I totally appreciate your viewpoint and think that it is highly logical and a good attitude to have towards training.
However, this is the KF forum, this is a WC thread, and yes, let's get some questions going and talk about tactics and techniques that may work well against grappling attacks. Let's think about the benefits and hazards etc.
I've actually been experimenting with this a little. As I've mentioned before, I still train in BJJ and I'm starting to see ways to relate what I learn in WC to it and vice versa. For example: we usually start sitting across from eachother on the mat (don't know if all bjj schools do it like that but think so). The opponents slowly move in and begin setting up an offense. Most of the less experienced students will try to rush in, thinking "oh he's just sitting on his butt so I'll knock him over". I love this one - lately I've taken to using a sort of sitting tan sao/bil sao and as soon as they pass my centerline, I pull guard or try to shrimp out from under the momentum and get their back. I'm trying to adapt this to the better guys, but I'm still a noob with WC so it'll be a while. Haven't tried much of this standing up yet either, although we used to practice variations on the same idea in JKD back in the day.
So, any other ideas?
Posted by: Tezza

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 04:35 AM

Exactly that was the idea of this thread to talk about WC technique.
Although we have changed it to talking about Grappling in general, lets try keeping it the the WC lines.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 11:40 AM

OK, let's change the view a bit here. WC versus an incoming grappling attack may have trouble, but what about when on the ground? Oddly enough last night in BJJ, I used Chi Sao quite effectively after being taken down.

I was clinched with the opponent, and went for a takedown. He was able to post his arm out and keep me from getting the mount, but I was able to pull guard. He immediately started going for a collar (gi) choke on me. I was able to parry and trap him repeatedly, until he gave up and attempted to break my guard, where I then started to attack his arms. He responded by going for the collar choke again, which I deflected using Chi Sao. I was actually able to parry his arm so far across his body, that I was able to push on his elbow, and get his arm wrapped all the way around (crossing in front) his own neck. I attempted what I know as a Cobra choke, but couldn't get my other hand behind his head to grab his arm.

Time was called on the round with neither of us getting a submission, but I did feel that I used CS effectively in that situation.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 12:53 PM

Nice work Matt! I was thinking about that the other day in BJJ as well - just with different limbs, the legs. I was on my back, keeping a standing opponent away with leg untangles and it hit me - this is a lot like chi sao! I think there's really something to this with these two applications working together. Very interesting indeed...
Posted by: monji112000

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 01:43 PM

Wing Chun ideas and concepts can be used used in any situation, just like BJJ ideas and concepts or anything else. Its something I want to experiment with when I have time.

The topic went off completely, I would love to hear other Wing Chun strategies for dealing with Those type of attacks.
Posted by: Fisherman

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 02:45 PM

Sweet Matt, nicely done. Good observation of skills used durring a match. I love it when I can see skills and techniques I have learned come out in sparring, push hands, etc.
I have noticed that when I get taken down and things go to the ground that I have a tendancy to use a lot of the snaking body motion developed in Bagua to get away.
Posted by: IExcalibui2

Re: WT vs. grappling attack - 07/12/06 06:19 PM

well the only grappling experience I've ever had was from play fighting with my brother, but Chi sao comes really natural to me so I guess it didnt even cross my mind (by the way I dont do WC). But after Matt just mentioned it I realize that in close ranges sticking is something I do alot. Also overall hand movement and techniques would work well when you're on the ground too. Whether you're on top trying to rain down bombs or on the bottom defending against them.