I don't need to go and train with the guy to be able to tell the example I posted contains an poor attack and a response that in all likelihood would end up in a crushed skull if done against someone with half a clue about the weapon being used. I also don't need to train with the gentleman to see in that video that the initial setup of the waza, the position started from, the indicator to attack which was given, meant that it was all one sided to begin with. This coupled with a bad uke might make it look workable to those there in that particular instance. However from the outside looking in it simply comes across as bad technique and a bad approach to training.
I don't care if this guy is "renowned" in the old school pyjamas world. If the proof really is in the pudding then I want to see fighters he's trained. And don't get into the old sport vs street thing because whilst they're different beasts, the most effective pressure test you'll find will be in the ring and if you're good enough to make money from it you will that's human nature.
I don't mind digs going in. I don't mind acting as uke and taking some shots (within reason). I don't mind taking some shots when I'm allowed to give them back. What I do mind is someone attacking at say energy level 3 and getting energy level 7 in return. If I'm going to get level 7 then I'm going to attack level 7. If I attack level 3 I expect level 3 back. What I see in Terry's vids is that imbalance in intent and energy and I think that's what is bothering some people too.
That's fair enough but you're probably not going to get it. Your quality control criteria are your own, and you're welcome to them, but I suspect that he and many his students probably don't aspire to be sports stars. Not everyone who's interested in martial arts is interested in ring sports.
And in addition to my post above I think people are more used to the imbalance of power going the other way in martial arts demos. So the attacker goes harder than the defender. Mr Wingrove's demos have the energy going the other way.
Not really. I agree that the ring (although perhaps I should say the training methodology for the ring) is a phenomenal way to accelerate your progress, but not all of us have the ring/sport paradigm. Competitive fighting is just one measure, albeit a solid one
With regards to fighting skill I'll reserve judgement but to me it looks like the same old tired BS. So he knows how to hurt people? It's not really that hard to look like a badass if your uke is just standing there and you're nailing them in the soft and hurty bits is it? I've had people do stuff to me compliently that bloody wrecked and made us look wicked slick. It doesn't mean anything - other than maybe as an indication of technical knowledge from an academic standpoint. From a student perspective, receiving that sort of stuff teaches you next to nothing. How many Booj ninjas belt the crap out of each other in the same fashion yet can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag? all this talk of the training being hardcore and not for everyone but a necessary evil is total jizz. It's a redundant, ineffective and frankly stupid way to train. It's just complience with added delusions of grandure. Drilling intelligently with timing, energy and motion and sparring with hard contact will teach you so much more than standing there like a lemon and letting some fat old geezer palm strike your nut sack any day of the week.
To be honest that's what I'd be looking for from a man of Terry's experience and longevity in the martial arts. Stuff that I could take back to my regular training, drill properly and integrate into what I already do. And I wouldn't expect to end up on the deck and need resuscitating by someone else in order to get it either.
I have to say I don't let an old geezer smack my nutsack any day of the week. It's strictly on Saturdays that happens.
I've got to comment on the idea that the test of a martial arts instructor is to look at the fighting record of his students - I've trained (in the almost 40 years that I have been training) with a wide range of instructors, old and young; military and civilian; weak and strong; traditional and modern; etc, etc etc... There have been a reasonable number of instructors who were complete rubbish, most were OK and some were fantastic - however I would find it VERY hard indeed to establish a correlation between sport success and fighting ability - they are different things - yes of course there is some overlap - a good sports fighter ought to be fit enough to engage in violence - but the really mean SOB's that I've met have (with a few exceptions) not been into sports at all. Also back in my Lau Gar days, (30+ years ago) Lau Gar fighters dominated semi and full contact (if I remember correctly) - but Lau Gar is NOT a self defence art it's far more of a sport art. And... the clincher for me, is that even if you do train a great sports fighter your detractors will simply say it's the fighter not the instructor... I would be SERIOUSLY impressed by anyone who criticized Terry Wingrove if they had trained with him - that would absolutely be valid from their POV - But if you have only seen a video.... PLEASE !!! - Oh heck, just thought of an exception - I have never trained with George Dillman and after seeing the 'toe wiggling' video, never would....
That video is legend! It has done more to purge his vile influenece than any investigation before or since!
That is exactly what I get out of it. I don't think there would be much point going otherwise. Well I don't have a problem with ending up on the deck but I've never needed resuscitating nor indeed had my nut sack slapped. Perhaps I've been missing all the fun. Mike
