Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Thai Bri
I don't have to do any leg work. You come from a given premise that he knew how to fight. You use that premise upon which to base your arguments. Along the lines of "WC is better than boxing because WSL left boxing for it". But so what? That may merely mean that he couldn't cut any ice in such a hard game, so he went to the trad MA world for an easier time. You have not shown that your premise is true, and the onus is on you.
Back to topic - I agree that the principles are too conflicting to really mix and match WC and Boxing. It would be a bit like trying to learn how to ride/drive a car and a motorbike at the same time.
|
1) "I dont have to do any leg work." Since you're doing the disputing. You dispel the myth with your facts instead of opinion. In other words, give me something tangible in this instance.
2) Where I base my premise and what I use to support it are two different things. You've obviously taken one statement and made a leap of thought (maybe you misread something?). I never once said (or insinuated) that because WSL left WC Wing Chun was superior and boxing was inferior. You drew that conclusion from way out in left field. But dont worry, I think I left enough bread crumbs that even you can follow.
3) What premise did I have to prove true? The premise of WSL had legitimate fights? Or the premise you conjured on my behalf?
4) If my statements had any underpinnings it was that WSL felt WC was more "complete" for fighting, than boxing after having seen what an old man can do.
-SA