here is where i disagree, wing chun has rules. all ways will do. you always have a way of doing things.its a style,will always stay the same. but fore the record i am a big wc fan. the blending does work, you have to be taught properly how to do it and understand it. look at rick young for example. has for the poor sticky hands part, i don't think you get the idea of what jkd trapping is, its more productive then wc in its attitude.\ also if you have a link to the inosanto vid, please post it
Agreed here. Everything has rules. Attempting to convince yourself of anything otherwise is ignoring a number of facts. - Matt
i know it is taught as a style by many, but so is jkd...this is just another misunderstanding. wing chun is not a style - it is not rigid and fixed. my experience to date is that it is based around concepts and reconditioning the body so that when you are free again you act in a mechanically effective & direct manner, being able to employ things when they are needed. like i said, the system has "rules" (which i called a "structured process" because the word "rules" sounds to absolutist) which you learn as you take the journey, before breaking them and being free again to employ these things when needed. I'm not going to train my body to always walk around with a rigid "fixed elbow position" that I must keep just because this is apparently a "rule" of the wing chun system - common sense will tell you this is a stupid thing to do - but i do want to train my body to be able to use and throw away the elbow position when needed (and this is a very hard thing to do). oh really . Sticky hands is not trapping. And in WC you only trap to hit while also avoiding being hit - what is more productive than that? - but laying out the same "concept" behind trapping doesn't mean the actual mechanics are going to necessarily be the same. it has already been posted earlier in this thread...but since you asked so nicely: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8676886721845918930&q=dan+inosanto
yeah i agree wing chun like jkd is based on principles, but wc sticks to one range. agree,but your still sticking to a certian way,you maybe free in that area, but its still in an structure again i agree that its designed to it,but from all my wing chun training and my jkd, i find that the jkd, is more aggresive in its motion.tho the principles are the same, and when i said you don't understand the jkd trapping i meant nothing bad, just its slightly different in its attitude, thats all. as for chi sao, i think they are on par here, i really like the method taken by alan gibson in chi sao
yeah...hitting range do you mean as if wing chun were a fixed style with rules that I cannot break? you think when Bruce Lee talked about "freedom" that he thought you could do whatever you want in a fight? of course not. you either hit or you don't...aggression doesn't come into it. I have a feeling you have been exposed to a different wing chun to what I have been exposed. if jkd "chi sau" looks anything like inosanto's "sticky hands" then I very much doubt that "jkd chi sau" is anything like the same. and what is alan gibson's "method" in chi sau?
To start: Trapping in karate is effective in the context of karate. Trapping in Wing Chun is effective in the context of Wing Chun. Their effectiveness in the context of a "live" situation depend upon how well the practitioner can apply them, and how the opponent reacts. The the attacker initiates with an Olympic-class single-leg takedown, trapping, by and large, is no longer relavent in the context of the fight. I'm not saying it's necessary for one to learn both approaches to trapping (or for that matter, any approach to trapping), but I think that being exposed to both, and working with them during training, makes for a more adaptable fighter. The difference between the two approaches? It seems to me that the Wing Chun approach is mostly, "get his hands out of the way to clear the centerline so I can attack it", while the karate approach seems to be, "use the limb to control his body, possibly ripping some joints, in order to set up for a big punch". How do they relate to Jun Fan? Obviously, due to the influence of Wing Chun, Jun Fan trapping is going to employ that attitude. How does it relate to JKD? The adaptability factor of "absorb what is useful". If the guy's good at defending his centerline, but leaves his arms out to be locked, then you'd probably have more success with the karate approach. Look, it ain't about "now I'm doing Wing Chun" or "now I'm doing karate", it's about, "I'm fighting". People get too caught up with the various systems and their approaches. Upon examining a handful of systems, commonalities will become apparent. Then, so will various concepts that some systems emphasize over others. The Wing Chun I'm learning has the following in common with the karate I learned, for example: -Linear attacks directed towards the center -The techniques of knife-hand, backfist, inside palm-up block, outside palm-up block, straight punches (albeit somewhat different) -A stance with the majority of the weight on the rear leg The differences, for example, are: -Wing Chun uses palm strikes -Trapping is more apparent in the forms of WCKF -karate uses a wider variety of stances -karate maintains a lower center of gravity Etcetera, etcetera... But at the end of the day, I'm a martial artist who's doing, not necessarily "karate" or "Wing Chun" or "boxing" or what have you, but "martial arts". I'm fighting, I'm not Wing-Chuning. And I think a lot of people miss that. I give credit to where I learned something, but once I learn something it's MINE to use as I want. I don't really claim to be a JKD guy necessarily, but in the end, isn't JKD about liberating yourself from a system, from pre-conceptions? Someotherguy, I just take a bit of exception to the notion that Wing Chun is the only system (or whatever you'd choose to call it) that offers such liberation. I use karate as an example because it's what I've put the most time into. However, I think that when you said, "it is based around concepts and reconditioning the body so that when you are free again you act in a mechanically effective & direct manner, being able to employ things when they are needed", you could have been talking about any system. For me it was Seikukan karate, or more recently, MMA. You found your liberation in WCKF, I, and I'd like to think others, have found it elsewhere.
no, why? because outside of punching range and grappling wing chun is weak. all wing chun is close range. wing chun is based of principles and has a defined way of dealing with different attacks.it is structured. there are certian footwork,elbow theroy. stuff like this,its set, if you break the rules and take it out of the wing chun structure and principles then its not wing chun. this is what bruce lee meant by freedom, not bound by a certain way. if you stay in wing chun you are not breaking its rules. this is not right. look at this example, tho both world class at trapping, their is a big differance between rick young and alan gibson for example. you have got confussed here. i've just watched the link you sent. dan inosanto is doing hubud its the kali (filipino) way of chi sau. chi sau in jkd is from wc they are different ways of doing the same thing
why would you want to try and trap a leg-takedown? you wouldn't look for a trap, you find it if there is one to be found...just like I am not going to straight punch out in front of me if the guy is wriggling on the floor by my feet. There is no rigid "wing chun way" of trapping - you say it isn't used to control the limb and the opponent's structure...I say it is. Similarly, why should karate not employ what you think is "wing chun trapping" if it is effective? did Bruce Lee teach you trapping? I think not, so you don't really know what Jun Fan trapping was doing or what the wing chun that Bruce Lee had learnt was doing. you think wing chun doesn't exploit an arm that is being left out there? well obviously. when you are fighting you are fighting. but training for the fight is different to the fight. did I say it was? I think that is something you have read but which was never written. if you say so if you say so is jkd not based on principles? yes. are principles rules? no. and yes wing chun has a "defined way" of dealing with attacks - counter obviously it is structured...there has to be a process through which the body passes in order for it to be reconditioned. but again, are theories rules? no. if i can employ the fixed elbow position when i need it...this is good, but I do not want to be a robot who walks into a fight insisting on keeping my elbow in a fixed position...this is stupid. is it jkd if I decide to dance around you before I throw a meandering hook when the straight punch was always available? am I a slave to jkd if I do not throw away the same principles of direct attack, economy of motion etc? world class at trapping? says who? and who says the difference between them is due to "aggression"? maybe you need to watch that link again (18th minute)
i do, wing chun is all close range, if you don't agree. does not matter,but its still true. there is no long range motions in wing chun FACT!! it was not designed for that. so far all you have replied with is if you say so. yes,so there is a stucture and doing wing chun means you are in that structure. every art counters,its still a style, its still structured to move in a certian way. i agree here, but what you are saying here, this is jkd, once you flow passed the structure you are expressing you. but you say wing chun goes beyond the close range and its principle, once it was set as a style it no longer did that. wing chun has boundaries.it has set technquies for itself. ok lets take a different approach here. wing chun principles are right. ok. now the technquies and structured way of dealing with whatever limits these principles. that why i said earlier that you can be free in the structure, but you can not go beyond it if you stick to the tools of wing chun. now yes jkd is based on principles, but these are designed to give you freedom to use what is useful for you. principles can be universal, technquies have a limit, and they limit wc, as you said you sometimes breaking these rules, therefore you are doing your own verison of jkd. you tell me who does not think these to are exellent at trapping. aggression is only apart of the make up.the wc normally waits first. jkd does not. having trouble with the link, have seen the video tho, can you send the link of the part you are talking about. but i don't remember him doing chi sao, i know he covers hubud
is this not obvious? you dont think that also in training my reaction is dependent on my training partner's action? seems to be... Can you learn how it feels from a video? Can you be sure that Bruce Lee passed everything on to his students or that they even absorbed what he threw at them? Do you think Inosanto's "wing chun" is going to represent Bruce Lee's or what Wong Shun Leung was doing when he taught Bruce Lee? why would it be wing chun? just because Bruce Lee had experience in wing chun? No I have not been taught by Bruce Lee and this is why I am not trying to claim that I know what Jun Fan is and is not. Well you said "it ain't about 'now I'm doing Wing Chun' or 'now I'm doing karate', it's about, 'I'm fighting'.....I'm fighting, I'm not Wing-Chuning." So why would I be "Wing-Chuning" in the fight anyway? You do karate or wing chun when you train...you fight when you fight. I thought it was pretty obvious. so boxing doesn't have rules? fencing doesn't have rules? I know fighting doesn't have rules. I'm not dismissing boxing at all...I'm simply stating the obvious about it. it is true because you say so or because it is true of what you have experienced of wing chun? why would I want to go for a "long range" kick when it will only leave me compromised and be too telegraphic? "block and then punch" is not a counter I guess jkd allows me to hope around like a frog if I feel like it because i am "free"? funny that isn't it. For all the talk (maybe from others) about how other systems are doing similar things...you should shocked that what you call "jkd" cannot exist anywhere outside of "jkd". I think I said earlier: Bruce Lee took his own path to similar ends if some people want to set wing chun as a style, they are more than welcome, but i'm not interested in that...just as I am sure you are not interested in people who set jkd as a style. this may well be true in what you have experienced as wing chun. it is interesting that you say this as if (what you think is) the jkd approach is superior. why do you think it would be of benefit to wait in training before reacting? I think wc both waits and does not...they are both important. it is from minute 18...about 15 seconds of it.
I believe Dan was also Brandon's MA instructor... i think if Brandon was alive alot would be expected of him just because he is Bruce's son.. he would be expected to carry on his fathers work with the development of JKD. However i think that Brandon would probably side with Dan on his beliefs on JKD solely because Dan had passed his MA philosophy to Brandon.
I need to pick this one apart as this is one of the great fallicies of self defense traditionalists. Fighting does have rules. A rather large number of them which have very serious ramifications. In the US it's typically referred to as "the force continuum." IE. You can't simply kill or maim someone (ie Bil Gee to eyes) in basic self defense. If the violence escalates, then your response can escalate. But to say that there are no rules, ignores all of the social rules that have to be followed if you don't want to have serious ramifications on the back end. - Matt
Someotherguy...I just watched the video with Dan and watched the part you were talking about (from 16 minutes to 20 minutes) I did see Dan show some Chi sao but it lasted all of about 10 seconds. He was showing the WC method of doing chi sao then went immediately to hubid drills from the Filipino Martial Arts. The video is about knife training so he was showing the difference in WC type chi sao and FMA type chi soa or energy drills. I have trained with a few Wing Chun guys that are local to me and they have very good trapping hands. I have also trained with Dan Inosanto on several occasions as well as trained with Larry Hartsell for the past 12 years and they to are very good at trapping. I think this is a subject that the two of you are going to have to agree to disagree. The main problem I see with people doing trapping is that so many people are doing it wrong. By that I mean they are not "trapping" the opponents arm to his body so he can not use it. Also when they do the pak it is not a "hit" it is more of a slap. I was taught by my first instructor and later by Sifu Hartsell that when you pak someone that is your first hit. Sifu Hartsell used to tell me that when Bruce would do a pak sao on you it was so hard that it would give you shell shock. So when we trap and we do pak sao we are using that as the first hit so to speak. We then make it a point to keep foward pressure on our opponents arm while we are hitting and going on to the next thing. We also like to step up and trap his foot so he can not get away. We also realize as you said Someotherguy...that we never look for the trap...they happen when they happen. They are a bi-product if you will of us moving into close range. Also just to comment on Magikmike05's comments about Jerry Poteet and other "jkd instructors not liking Dan"...You do realize that Jerry Poteet trained with Bruce a minimal amount of time? He then became a member of Dan's backyard JKD group. Jerry Poteet and Ted Lucaylucay were the first two students of Dan's to be certified by Dan from the backyard group training days. As for Taky Kimura Bruce told Dan that Taky would always be his senior brother...Dan makes mention of this in several articels he has done. Why the split among all the instructors I am not sure. I do not think it is right however for all of these guys that have been trained and certified by Dan to be against him now. Anyway in closing I think that both Wing Chun and Jun Fan has very good trapping, most of it I have found depends on who is showing you the trapping.
fighting has no rules. its kind of like if a tree falls and no one hears it does it make a sound. aside from whatever legal aspects your talking about maiming, and jabbing eyes, if im being attacked by X person, i really could care less about any legal ramification. self defense is self defense.
I will again say this is the falicy of bad RBSD and tough talking self defense people. That is also how tough talkers end up in jail. For as good as Ed Parker's quote is "Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six" -- I can tell you from personal experience that the prison system is full of people who say they were "just acting in self defense." There are rules to fighting and war. - Matt
i would just like to point out that unless you are a naughty person, it is YOU being attacked and with that in mind do you REALLY think that consequences of your actions within that moment will play a part in your reactions, cause i personally think with the sudden adrenaline rush coupled with the fact of being attacked will negate any thoughts, hence the reason for reactive based training that dont engage the brain or to put it more simply you wont have time to think! so in reality the thought of self imposed 'rules' when fighting is quite frankly a scary and dangerous mindset and i can only hope you dont get YOUR nose bitten half off by someone in a pub toilet as happened fairly recently to a friend of mine (i think the attacker forgot the rules, can anyone say REF )
