Why your style *****.

[AAAhmed46]

Uh Omega isnt flaming other styles.

He is a kung-fu man, and he grills kung-fu.

He also used to box and do BJJ.

But he is now a MMA fighter, and has posted videos of himself getting creamed.




As for UFC fighters not having to deal with glass on the ground:

Who will fair better, you with your RBSD experience or bas rutten who was a bouncer and fights for a living, when rolling around on the ground with glass all around you?
Most UFC guys know the difference between the ring and the street(other then the gracies who insist the ground is where you want to be) Watch Dan Severn and other people street defence videos and they do NOT teach 'ground and pound'.

Not even Rorian Gracie, he doesnt ever go to the ground on his self defence videos. And he is one of the worlds biggest 'ground is everything' promoter.

So how long would you last against a UFC fighter on the streets?


The whole point of this rant was that "Everyone *****" basically, nothing and no one's style is perfect.

Though maybe he should have included MMA.



Bas rutten says some interesting stuff, though i suspect he may be saying this to promote his business:

Q:
Who do respect as a fighter?
Bas rutten:
Everybody who steps into a ring, cage or mat. Everybody who competes. If you never competed yourself and you are always talking about fighters should do this or that, you don't know what you are talking about. They say a lot of times, this guy is good, he has a black belt, or he had a lot of street fights or he is really good in the Dojo. That all doesn't mean ##### compared to fighting in front of an audience, friends, family, maybe TV and a real fighter as an opponent. Not some guy on the street who doesn't know anything. You hear: "This guy is undefeated in 500 street fights", so what? He fought against untrained people, I can make a record of 50 and 0 in one night if I want. Fight against real fighters and THEN you are the man, winning or loosing, just put down a good fight.

[-Metablade-]

Uh Omega isnt flaming other styles.

He is a kung-fu man, and he grills kung-fu.

He also used to box and do BJJ.

But he is now a MMA fighter, and has posted videos of himself getting creamed.

I would argue that using explitives or denoting explitives or talking about a certain MA (even if it your own) in a highly critical way which is meant to look down upon it is inflamitory and as such generally considered a flame.

[AAAhmed46]

If you look around at Bullshido, everything is a flame.

The only thing the mods really do is move posts that dont belong in the right place or bad people with multiple accounts.

Thier 'politics' section has some borderline racist posts.

So it's not the most...friendly place.

[-Metablade-]

My point exactly.
Waaaaaay to much testosterone at that site.
Even for a barbarian like me!
LOL!

[cxt]

Although I applaud the goals of Bullshido, I pretty much decry the methods they use to make their point.

They folks over there tend to be every bit as blindly dogmatic and impervious to logic as the people they claim to hate.

They make the same errors in logic, build the same "straw men."

Like I said, I honestly respect their goals---just shake my head at their methods.

[AAAhmed46]

DO NOT say that 'you should not inentionally to the ground in a street fight''over there.


Despite the logic of such a comment they will eat you, thats the dogma they have there about MMA. They cant take critisism.


And no matter how sound your logic is about kata, dont mention it there.



It's a DAMN fun site though!

MUCH better then many forums.

[AAAhmed46]

Here is my take on things like this keep in mind i think all styles are good, im just talking about the bad:


SHotokan: The style has alot of depth. There are some great shotokan guys around.

Yet what the HELL is up with every other school? All the good moves are barely practiced, and those that are are used in an unrealistic manner(the 'blocks' resemble grapples and strikes to me)

And the chambering.....the chambering......


But there are some GREAT shotokan guys running around!




WING CHUN:

Look, im sure by cross training in wing chun one can learn some great stuff.
BUT IT IS NOT A COMPLETE stand up SYSTEM.
Essentially it's trap a little, chain punch the center line, trap and chain punch the center line.

There is no defined way to defend against a muay thai style round house kick to the legs, no clinching.

There are ways to defend against hooks in wing chun, yet they are the bane of wing chunners.

And the power generation has little depth.



TAIJI, Pa KUa, hsing i:
You know, most taiji, pa kua, hsing ipeople seem to realize that they are learning to fight but would not be able to use thier moves unless they are pressure tested and not just doing push hands.
Yet a considerable number believe thier push hands make them invincible. The same goes for pa kua and xing yi.
Great styles, with a hell of alot of depth, great power generation.
But i get into arguements with some guys online on this.
The styles are great but damn...it's not perfect.

Aikido: Ueshiba trained for over 60 years in martial arts and year the end of his life he was able to effortlessly throw people around.
Most aikido people think they can do what he did after almost fifty years of training in five years.
You are not stephen segal.

Uechi-ryu: Use the search function, lots of heat..........


BJJ: Listen crapplers, grappling is great but it has it's limitations and there are things other grappling styles have that BJJ lacks(and vice-versa). Thats right, i said it. Want proof? Walk into a shootwrestling school.

[JimHawkins]

BUT IT IS NOT A COMPLETE stand up SYSTEM.

Of course, I would disagree.. It is quite complete in terms of a complete set of stand up strategies that all fit together. The longest technique in the system is the sidekick and the shortest is the shoulder butt..

How many systems have such a broad standup range?

Essentially it's trap a little, chain punch the center line, trap and chain punch the center line.

Essentially the idea is to complement the opponent's actions and fit in with him using the concepts I have posted about many times here.. But this will mean different things to different WCK people at different levels.

There are three or so kicks, numerous leg techniques, numerous controlling moves, three or more fists techniques, at least two kinds of palms, the chop, two elbow moves, the spear hand, shoulder butt, half clinch, kicks, an array of jams, parries, traps, etc, etc.. Much more than what you seem to think--lot's of material and more than enough to qualify as a 'complete standup' system IMO. In fact, I think it would be easier to argue that WCK has too many things in it for use in stand up, although perhaps less than the more elaborate Chinese systems that have dozens of sets.

Of course you have to find or see someone who actually knows the system and has some skill before any of the more advance elements will be apparent, although there are certainly bits and pieces to be found on the Net.

There is no defined way to defend against a muay thai style round house kick to the legs

According to whom? WCK has more leg techniques in the sticking legs work than does Tae Kwon Do.. But you will not find beginners who know them, you may not find anyone who knows them.. WCK deals with kicks by eating space, clashing with the legs, sticking, filling and using the legs to take space and balance while at the same time attacking above with the hands..

no clinching.

WCK has a half bowtie "clinch" and spends most of the training time in closer ranges than 99% of any other standup system or style. What WCK does not do is use techniques that tie up the WCK person's hands, for example many common clinches will tie up both fighters this is contrary to how WCK operates, WCK wants to tie up the opponent but keep the WCK person's hands free to attack with. This is why WCK is not supposed to use the thumb to wrap when "grabbing".

There are ways to defend against hooks in wing chun, yet they are the bane of wing chunners.

No idea what this means. One of the most common techniques in WCK is called Tan Da which many use for this, however there are many other ways WCK deals with circular attacks, not the least of which is to simply attack. One of the best ways WCK has to deal with a circular attack is the inside wa-uke, of course it's a WCK wa-uke <inside lop--first move set in the dummy starts with a nukite.. but IMO it's essentially the same one found in Uechi but done with an attack by the other hand--which can also be done with 'turning' and spiraling power to ****** in with the wa-uke while you add whipping power to the hit with the other hand, which could be anything from a fist to an inside upper cutting side palm, the main difference being the position of the elbow for protection against the opponent's other hand. And while this is all fine and dandy, a tight inside hook is not really something I would advise folks to train to block as at this distance our attack must be fully developed and supported though energy issuing, and top and bottom control/attack.

And the power generation has little depth.

According to whom?

You saw the screen test of Bruce doing various strikes.. Most of the mechanics he was using were plain vanilla WCK... You mentioned you thought he had power there and I am certain you are right. WCK mechanics will not look like brand X but like many other systems it uses compression of the legs, opening of ALL the joints from the ground up as well as a spiraling rotation of the body...

Many will confuse WCK's tendency not to over commit to an attack--ie bending the lead knee and sinking to mean there is something missing. However WCK uses all the joints in the body in various ways to hit with the body.. In the second form the hands are mostly moving with the body, in short explosive bursts so the legs and body and hands are moving as one. WCk uses exact alignment of the feet-hips-elbows, etc with the target in conjuction with all joints opening to make exacting linear power for closing; It also uses body rotation or spiraling that starts from the feet to rotate the hips and body which takes on a spiral whipping kind of power, hence the term whipping punches--folks will often think they are hooks--they are not. All of these methods serve different needs at different times and can be combined or used in parts for different tactical purposes.

Folks will not see large and overt extensions of the legs and reaching with the arms so they don't see "power". But what they don't see is long extending power--WCK uses smaller angles in the opening of the joints, shorts shifts of torque. WCK is a close range system with very short range power--short range power requires short range mechanics and will not be the same as long range mechanics. The idea in WCK is never to "reach" and never to over commit to the attack but to attack with the whole body as Hawkins Cheung states you are attacking with your body not the arm or fist or whatever--but the center of balance must be moved in short bursts to maximize stability and to minimize momentum that could be used by the enemy to steal balance...

AND I don't take any of these 'critisisms' negatively, nor do they make me angry nor do I feel the need to make negative comments or hurl insults at people in return--I can simply address the issues..

[jorvik]

For a "Style" to be called a style it must have a method. It must favour one approach over another
look at BJJ, the Gracies like to grapple and punch on the ground and against someone who is unskilled at that they are very good. Other styles favour another range. Now you get very general styles, such as say boxing which is a sport which just uses punches, or taekwon do.but they must all have a preferred method, tactics and skills in that preffered method.
If you don't have that you can still call yourself a style if you like, but you are going to be a pretty poor one. look at Tai-chi, yeah it is a style and it does have a method which is very clever and sophisticated, however a lot of folks only know the slow motion exercises and a lot of them get even that badly wrong. It is the same with Wing-chun and very probably with Uechi.I'm afraid that I have been unable to find the preffered range of Uechi or it's tactics, but maybe it's just pretty poor on my side of the pond...or maybe it is a general style.like boxing

[AAAhmed46]

Uh, noticed how i grilled.....everyone.....


Oh come on jim, are you saying Wing chun is a flawless sytem? All systems have thier faults including uechi, kyokushin, muay thai and even the oh so powerful MMA.




Hey Jim, boxing isnt a complete system, but there is no way in hell i would want to mess with one. Im sure a good WC guy would be just as scary. Hell look at bruce lee!

Wing chun isnt complete. It was created during war time so it was quick and easy to teach. Im sure the wing chun dudes at the time of it's conception were awsome, since they needed it to survive.


But a style created to be mastered easily would not have depth. And it SHOULDNT, otherwise it's purspose would be defeated.

Same with choi li fut.

Lots of Choi li fut guys run around saying thier style is complete, but it too, like wing chun was created to be learned really quickly.

I talked on Martial arts planet forums in a PM with a MMA guy who cross trians in Choi li fut. He loves his training, he does not believe he would be as good as he is without his choi li fut, but he admits that it is not a complete system.


Look at BJJ, for the ground it is complete, but as a whole fighting system? No.

Muay thai is a VERY complete stand up system, they fight from the clinch and they fight from sparring distance.

Sanda is even more, no hardore ground work but take downs galor.

Can MOST uechi, shotokan and wing chun guys compare to them? Thier STYLES can, but the way they train, can those compere? If you got 9 aikido people from different schools against 9 BJJ or Judo players, how well do you think the Aikido guys will do?
If you get 9 shotokan guys and put them against muay thai players, what will happen?


Im not talking about hardcore guys here like:
marcus, Rick Wilson , bill Glasheen, van canna, jim malony and Jim hawkings, and some others that were nto mentioned.
But others?


Shotokan and Uechi WERE complete, but they cant do anything, they usually are sissies(present company on these boards excluded)

Once again, like shotokan and uechi, wing chun probably has all stand up techniques but do not practice them.

And THATS what im talking about.


As OMEGA said: "It's like playing tag"

And that IS what has happened to wing chun, uechi, shotokan.

In martial arts circles, i kid you not, telling someone



This thread is the bad things of every freaking style.


Hell, karate people bug just as much as wing chunners. TKD people bug me even more(Though bas rutten comes from a TKD background, and he talks of some really good TKD players)

[AAAhmed46]

On wing chun in particular:


Have you walked up to a muay thai person and said: Throw a round house kick at my legs and i will block it.


I used to believe you can block kicks with your hands, but i soon learned by experience and research.....no. Jamming a muay thai style round house is not something i would do.


On the clinch, the bow tie clinch. It's probably taught, but how much is it practiced? Are there lots of drills on it? Is it used in sparring?
It's probly there, since you trap. It's existence isnt the question, it's how much you train in it.


Trapping: Great skill. And the staple of wing chun. If used properly with the right intent, a useful skill, great for transitioning into a clinch or take down, great for postioning.
Sticky hands: When put in a dynamic context, it's great.
Personal i dont like it because i ****** at sticky hands but thats just me. Another great skill.



Power generation: I learned a type of chain punching in my old karate school, with a horizontal instead of verticle fist.
You can generate alot of power with chain punching, but to do so you will have to seriously modify the way you chain punch. I dont see many wing chun people do it other then bruce lee and that spanish guy from that other video clip i posted on ricks forum, his body would change when he did chain punching. But lets not forget that bruce lee loved to take what was useful and get rid of the garbage. He obviously took many good things from his wing chun training, but added stuff as well, as seen in the way he strikes.
Wing chun was a style created to be taugh quickly during warfare, power generation takes a while to develop, so of coarse really isnt in the style. Doesnt make it bad. One of wing chuns good points is that it is easy to learn.



Though this is why i posted this thread. When a syle is critisized people just jump at it.


I do not see any uppercuts in any karate style, obviously when a karate dude does it it was added in. Which is good. Randy loves uppercuts, but i dont see any in the kata. That doesnt make upper cuts not uechi, just wasnt part of the kata, the system.

Muay thai originally did not punch the way they do, but adopted boxing methods of punching and training.


Look how far they have gotten!

[eastcoast_bsc]

Hey aaamed, Is hard sparring prevalent in Uechi ryu? I know the Kyokushin guys are said to spar and train very hard. Also Muay Thai and MMA folks. What are your opinions on the strengths and weaknesses of FMA? I like the questions though, good stuff.

[AAAhmed46]

I dont know much about FMA.


All i know is that if a filipino guy has a stick or a knife in his hands and is mad at you, you should run.

[JimHawkins]

Oh come on jim, are you saying Wing chun is a flawless sytem?

That would depend on what one means by flawless.

Do I see problems with how it is trained? Yes.

Do I see limitations in what WCK covers? Yes.

But I also understand the theory of WCK as seeking perfection in movement, in energy, etc so I see WCK as more an idea which can be applied over a variety of areas.

All systems have thier faults including uechi, kyokushin, muay thai and even the oh so powerful MMA.

See above..

Wing chun isnt complete. It was created during war time so it was quick and easy to teach. Im sure the wing chun dudes at the time of it's conception were awsome, since they needed it to survive.

Again this would depend on what YOU mean by complete. Complete in the sense that I am talking about is a complete set of strategies that fit together and as Ray said, that 'must favor one approach over another' WCK clearly has that and uses multiple layers of concepts that all come together to support the main objective.

Look over the points I made in my last post on this thread, WCK covers quite a bit.

But a style created to be mastered easily would not have depth. And it SHOULDNT, otherwise it's purspose would be defeated.

Same with choi li fut.

I can't speak for CLF but--and let me be very clear--WCK is not easy to master! I personally have never heard anyone who has mastered or reached a high level claim such a thing--in fact I know some advanced folks who would get belly laughs from hearing such a thing. I suggest that these ideas you have do not reflect the reality of the training, the path, the goal or the reality of the depth.

WCK may well be easier to develop a modicum of skill than some other more complex styles but then I would have to "master" both to compare them--not something I have yet done; and if it was so easy then certainly I would have at least mastered WCK, which is not the case.

Folks spend years, decades or more mastering how to manage energy and control in WCK alone. Ip Man who weighed in at around 90 pounds was able to toss his much larger and heavier students around in to his 70s was this level of skill "easy" to achieve? Anything that takes so long to refine and offers the ability to use others energy to defeat and control them in my book IS depth....

I talked on Martial arts planet forums in a PM with a MMA guy who cross trians in Choi li fut. He loves his training, he does not believe he would be as good as he is without his choi li fut, but he admits that it is not a complete system.

Well that ***** for him...

But again it depends what one means by complete.. If we are talking about complete, as in say ground fighting then I agree the WCK I learned was not complete because it did not address this range. If we mean something else then I don't know.. Fact is that it takes many MANY years to develop high level sticking skills and learn how to manage energy of the opponent..Not including sticking leg training. Now if that isn't enough there are TWO weapons to master after that.. Now do you really think it would be easy to master all that by any stretch of the imagination? If so then we have two very different views of the world.

Muay thai is a VERY complete stand up system, they fight from the clinch and they fight from sparring distance.

So MT is complete but WCK is not? Sorry but I don't see the logic there. WCK does more, and more involved close range training, it has way more 'stuff' in it, it has more 'soft' elements in the close range training yet it is less complete? Sorry can't buy that one. Now do most MT folk train harder? Sure, but this has nothing to do with complete or not complete *systems*..

Once again, like shotokan and uechi, wing chun probably has all stand up techniques but do not practice them.

And THATS what im talking about.

Practice them how? Who? In what school? What master? At what level of contact?

If we are talking style then you have to address what is in the style.. How school A trains vs. B does not reflect on what is IN the style.. All students have the ability to take their training to whatever level they want. Light contact, no contact, hard contact.. Realistic training, basic training, etc.. The more skill you want the more and harder you train, some will always take the art to a higher level and some may think they are but are not.. It depends on what the basic tenants of the system is, in fact many WCK folks I have spoken with are not familiar with much of what I know as WCK.

As OMEGA said: "It's like playing tag"

And that IS what has happened to wing chun, uechi, shotokan.

In martial arts circles, i kid you not, telling someone

This thread is the bad things of every freaking style.

Hell, karate people bug just as much as wing chunners. TKD people bug me even more(Though bas rutten comes from a TKD background, and he talks of some really good TKD players)

There are a lot of abstracts. You have to have several things come together to make a real WCK expert or what ever style expert.

You have to have:

1. A qualified teacher

2. A qualified teacher willing to teach the real material

3. A dedicated student

4. A smart student

5. A talented student

6. A student with enough time to train long and well

And more--there are many variables..

Many of the old masters did not pass on the correct information to their students. This came to light recently on the board from the Takeda article and the same was true for Ip Man, this stuff was NOT passed on the way some do today, it was *privileged* and sacred--to be passed to only a few folks. The result--many folks today have learned contrived crap that was never intended to work nor did it represent the style in question. The further you are from the source chances are the more BS there is in the mix.

Have you walked up to a muay thai person and said: Throw a round house kick at my legs and i will block it.

First off the premise is off here. The idea in WCK is not to block, blocking is silly.. It's passive, contains no offensive component.

You write:

I used to believe you can block kicks with your hands, but i soon learned by experience and research.....no. Jamming a muay thai style round house is not something i would do.

Blocking low kicks with hands is yet more folly.. It's like training to punch folks in the foot.. No economy there just silliness.

Back to the question:

Have you walked up to a muay thai person and said: Throw a round house kick at my legs and i will block it.

Ask yourself the following: Do you think that we have never had MT folks in the old Chinatown school? Do you think I have never bumped into a MT person?

So sure I have--but not BLOCK!!!! Did you read my reply on your low round kick defense? Did it make any sense to you? Did you try it? The keys in dealing with this kind of attack as with any kind of attack is being sensitive to the distance at which the attack will be made.

In dealing with any kicker, but especially a MT guy, if you know when he can kick you distance wise then you can bet that kick is going to come or at least it may come. So you need to take some kind of action.. In WCK the action to such an attack will be to use the legs to take advantage/or simply attack--off his action and make some use of it. In the old days we had a few guys from the old Chinatown school go to Thailand and at least one of them got disqualified for planting their kicks in the opponent's crotch when they kicked..

WCK deals with low kicks with the legs, hence "sticking legs"..

On the clinch, the bow tie clinch. It's probably taught, but how much is it practiced? Are there lots of drills on it? Is it used in sparring?
It's probly there, since you trap. It's existence isnt the question, it's how much you train in it.

Wrong..

You were discussing the system--so it's there--if "Bobby's school" doesn't train it that's' too bad but it has nothing to do with the system.

Trapping: Great skill. And the staple of wing chun. If used properly with the right intent, a useful skill, great for transitioning into a clinch or take down, great for positioning.
Sticky hands: When put in a dynamic context, it's great.
Personal i dont like it because i ****** at sticky hands but thats just me. Another great skill.

There are not traps just positions.. The idea is to use their energy to gain position, control, steal balance.. And you don't ****** at WCK sticking hands unless you have trained WCK sticking hands..right? I am certain with the right WCK teacher you would do fine at WCK sticking..

Power generation: I learned a type of chain punching

There is no such thing as "chain punching" in WCK per se. There is chaining and there is punching. Many WCK hand and even leg moves can be "chained".. It is simply a way of connecting strikes into a continuous attack--the glue that holds them together.

Folks who ****** will become a WCK egg beater, start chain punching and walk in.. This is not WCK it's just BS...

You can generate a lot of power with chain punching, but to do so you will have to seriously modify the way you chain punch.

To take a line from Bill--Stop right there!

*I* know how to make power with the chaining.. I have posted about it before and you are right, Bruce did it and so does Grados, it is a no brainer--no need to modify how I do it.. I came from karate, that was a bastardized mix of Shotokan and Uechi.. The first form I ever learned BTW folks was SANCHIN!

I first learned power there as well as hard sparring so when I came to the WCK I was looking at it from a different viewpoint than many others. BTW would love to hear what changes YOU think need to be made..

But it's really a no brainer, either you have the body action in sync with the strikes or you don't. The more advanced power answer is in the second and also third forms--nuff said.

I agree that all styles and systems are not complete or perfect if you are looking for a single style to do everything but the very nature of a style or system is that is doesn't try to do everything, rather it tries to specialize.. Humans are short lived creatures who IMO do not have the time or ability to master all things.. This is why there are systems or styles that specialize and focus just like in medicine..No one person can be an expert in everything we are just too limited as plain imperfect human beings..

[AAAhmed46]

Okay...im too lazy to reply to all that so dont get mad if this is really general.

Well the consensus with you right now is that MOST of wing chun's problems are in the schools.

And now that i look back at that chain punching post i made, yeah i agree i think it really is how your taught and not the method.

But wing chun has it's limitations(as does uechi), and maybe after all these years things have been added on, but even in full contact sparrin clips, two guys trap and trap and then one guy is overwhelmed by chain punches.

But what if your opponent is a tough guy who wont get overwhelmed and can recover?

Im sure many wing chun guys can overcome such an opponent, but to do so they would have to go against what thier sifu has taught them(theory, not the moves).



There's alot of movement in wing chun i think could be put to good use if people stopped listening to thier sifu.