fire cobra

There are techniques in most decent traditional martial arts that let smaller lighter weight people with less strength win out againt the strong guys,i am a small guy and have sparred all sizes and shapes over the last 30 odd years and know what i can and cant apply against the bigger lads(heavys) as a example non of the 20 stone plus over 6 foot guys can get out of my neck clinch or stop me pulling there head down, this comes from training and sparring with them of course,for example in Muay Thai i wouldnt use the modern way of standing in front of your opponent in range and matching strength and speed,thats why we have tricks in Muay Thai,a trick for every fighter against every other fighter,and i have seen the same things in other good trad martial arts,the arts work because they have been worked for years,the question is can we work them? thats up to us and just how far we want to go in keeping it real,off topic a bit sorry!.

Mike Brewer

Unless he was boxing at a military academy of for a program like WCAP, it's hard to verify a boxing record for a soldier. Most of those kinds of competitions are base tournaments and the like. In other words, no one cares except the guys in the tournaments. I almost had the chance to participate in one tournament when I was in Korea (duty got in the way ) but I made an acquaintance of one 1LT who competed at heavyweight. Trying to locate him later when he was tranferred to Ft. Carson, I tried to find him via the Korean base's boxing tournament record. There wasn't one.

Of course, a lot of those stories about hundreds of fights without a loss probably parallel my own experience in the bars. I likely participated in a few hundred "fights" but most all of them were me throwing a drunk out of the bar. They weren't terribly difficult (generally speaking) and no one was there to raise my hand at the end or tell me I had "won." The guys I threw out always ended up outside, I guess. Some people might say that's a win. However, much like the fights I got into working Loss Prevention and security jobs, they were in the line of duty and the deck was usually stacked in my favor (preparedness and backup vs. drunk or stupid opponents). As such, I don't think they really constitute a "record."

I only throw that out there because it always makes me suspicious to hear people talk about their "streetfighting records."

Mike Brewer

Sorry Liberty. I missed this very valid question.

The bottom line in the statement I made is that all other things being equal, size and strength are an advantage. In fact, they can overcome a deficit in many areas. A good little guy fighting a pretty good big guy, both in shape, will usually go to the big guy. Now a great little guy fighting a mediocre or untrained little guy? I give that to the little guy. There are plenty of things that can tip the scales, like training and technique, but they will never ever erase the fact that size and strength do matter. For instance, if size and strength did not matter, a little guy would be able to beat a big guy with the same training. A 120 pound blue belt in BJJ would have no trouble with a 250 pound blue belt in BJJ. But that's not iusually how it works. Usually, two guys with equal skill will come down to attributes. That's why competitions have weight classes. You have to ask yourself honestly, if training and technique actually negated size and strength, why the need to match people up by size? A 105 pound woman should have no trouble at all fighting a 300 pond man in a BJJ or Judo tournament. But they do, don't they.

People don't like to hear it, but it's the same exact thing with boxing. A good lightweight can learn to hit hard and correctly. He can drop a heavyweight on his ass with a good shot, and he can flat out manhandle an untrained person in most circumstances. But if you add training to the other guy? The equation levels off fast. As such, training does not overcome size and strength. It only adds to someone's pool of attributes. If the big strong guy has some training as well, then those attributes are gone.

The argument that size and strength do not matter, or that technique can completely negate them is a myth. Like I said before, fighting is always in some measure a crap shoot. Luck plays a role, and it can go either way on any given day. To repeat one of my favorite quotes of all time,

"The race does not always go to the fastest, nor the competition to the strongest...but it's the way to bet."

Liberty

[quote] You have to ask yourself honestly, if training and technique actually negated size and strength, why the need to match people up by size? A 105 pound woman should have no trouble at all fighting a 300 pond man in a BJJ or Judo tournament. But they do, don't they. [quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong ON THIS PART OF YOUR POST, Mike, but I've seen footage of the very first UFCs and they don't have weight categories. As a result, matches are over before they start, if you will. As a result, weight classes were added to improve entertainment, marketability through longer lasting matches due to same weight class, for one. After which, what's left is, "the better man." So, while I basically agree with your post, the above is up for grabs.

Mike Brewer

The early UFCs prove the point more than they disprove it. Against guys with NO ground training, size and strength can be overcome. Once the opponents are even basically familiar with the game, though, it changes. If you look at the early UFCs, you'll see Royce Gracie beating the tar out of a bunch of guys who've never seen his particular game played. He worked people over who were much bigger and stronger than he is, because they lacked training and familiarity. But later on, against someone like Matt Hughes, he got his ass kicked outright. He didn't even put up a fight. Matt was much smaller than say, Dan Severn, so Gracie's training should have overcome Hughes the way it did Dan Severn, right? What was the difference? Matt was familiar with the game to a degree that Severn wasn't, and he was a good bit stronger than Royce. That means training was negated by training, and strength became an advantage.

Likewise, can you picture what might happen with someone like Anderson Silva against Royce? You have an even bigger, stronger guy with equal skill. Who's that fight going to go to? Once again, if training is the ONLY difference, then sure, it can overcome strength and size. However, the minute you compare two trained guys? Size and strength matter again. As such, training isn't overcoming size or strength, but inexperience and unfamiliarity. Make sense?

Grixti

All very clear points Mike. So if size and strength have the advantage when the skill of the fighters is equal this raises the question: Can one reach a level of skill that is so great that it cantr be overcome by the advantages of attributes like size and strength.

This links back to the martial art philosophy-type stuff.

"In Kamon, size and strength dont matter"

Although this statement is a bit broad to be fact it does boil down to the idea of skill having less limits then the attributes we have been talking about(size, speed, strength, reach etc). What i mean by this is that if someone could reach a certain level of skill then these attributes wouldnt matter. There is a limit to strength and speed (look at world records) but is there a limit to skill? What do you guys think?

Mike Brewer

What's essential in your point/question is to try and understand what constitutes "skill." In other words, if we're going to determine whether or not there's a limit to skill, we have to first separate out what's "skill" and what is basically the attributes that allow skill to be applied. Does that make sense?

In other words, let's take someone like Bruce Lee. He was by all accounts a phenom. He was small and light, but everyone he ever hit said he was a runaway cement truck in terms of power and a rifle shot in terms of speed. But was that skill? Or was it speed and power? Likewise, if we're looking at a Brazilian Jiujitsu armbar, we can see that as a technique, it is leverage based. However, to apply it, one needs a certain degree of flexibility, sensitivity, timing and yes, strength (especially when applying it to someone that's huge and very strong). So is the skill itself then limited by all those attributes needed to apply it?

I would suggest that since physical attributes are all limited in the manner you pointed out, so then is skill. Skills, techniques, knowledge, and anything else related to the comparative level of martial understanding (which is what I understand the discussion to be about) is only real when it is applied. In other words, a "technique" doesn't exist without a "technician." Someone has to apply it. And the thing that allows someone to apply anything relates directly to the physical. You do it with your body, and therefore your body is a factor. With me?

I think skill can be developed to a degree that it will take care of the bulk of situations you'll ever face, yes. I think you can develop your understanding of fighting to an exceptional level, and you'll be very hard to beat as a result. A good example (outside CMA, unfortunately) is James Toney, the boxer. He's moved up all the way from middleweight to heavyweight. In so doing, he's gotten out of shape to the point he's often mocked as the KFC Heavyweight Champion. But he still wins most of the time. Why? His skill is far and away greater than most of hte heavyweights he's faced. So yes, skill can make up for a lot. Again, however, he's limited by his physicality at least to the degree that his body can hold up and do what his mind wants it to do. Ever heard the phrase "The mind is willing but the flesh is unable?" That is one way of saying "the level of skill was greater than the ability to carry it out." Think about retired athletes, for example. Former world champs might be able to tell you all about how to perform at a world class level, but when their physicality fails due to age, inactivity, non-participation, etc., the skill diminishes.

If you ask me, the idea that skill evolves beyond physical attributes is true only when we use that most unique of human attributes - intellect. When we realize that we can and have created tools that nullify attributes (i.e. they perform identically in the hands of a weak person as a strong person - firearms, etc.), then yes - you've surpassed physical attributes.

But before OldSchool reads my mind and heads off the argument ( ), if you add attributes back into that mix, they can again be an advantage. I know I'm getting circular with the argument, so I'll wrap it up thus:

Can you develop skill to a degree that it cannot be overcome by attributes? That depends on whether or not you can separate skill from attributes as an independent characteristic. If not, then the answer is no.

Grixti

Well if we are to determine what skill is lets look at all the attributes that make up a good fighter. We have discussed how speed, power, strength can be advantages. We also know that they can be improved with practice and have a limit due to the nature of the human body.

So what other attributes make up a great fighter? Maybe timing, rhythm, reflexes, accuracy. It seems to me that these factors are also what makes up all great fighters. The difference with these attributes is that they are less reliant on the physical ability of the fighter. Obviously the physical is always going to be neccessary, a paralysed person would not be able to practice any of these attributes.

Another way we can seperate these attributes from the former (Speed strength etc) is with the following example:

If you had a group of 12 year old boys and gave them all a baseball bat and asked them to hit a ball that you throw at them, some will do better than others. As they are all of the same age and before puberty its most likely that their physical attributes are similar. But some will definitely be able to hit the ball better than others. I think this would be down to these other attributes (timing, reflexes, accuracy etc)

(This is closely linked to another thread by Michael Wright about talent which is pretty much the same thing)
Do you believe in Talent?

But you point still holds: how far can we seperate these skill/talent attributes from the physical? It doesnt matter how fast your reflexes are if your muscles arent fast too.

So my conclusion? I dont have one really. I think even these other attributes still fall under the same restrictions as the physical ones, the only difference being that they are more natural to the individual. A good fighter may not be naturally strong or fast but he can improve that greatly with training - the same fighter might have outstanding timing, rhythm and reflexes and thats what makes him a world champion.

Mike Brewer

So it seems we have a conundrum! Let's see if we can better distill it so we can discuss the possibilities. There's probably no definitive answer here, so let's instead focus on trying to find some solid ground for agreeing on an answer that is most fitting.

First problem:
Can skill overcome attributes, even though skill itself is dependent on attributes?

Second problem:
Is "skill" different from "technique?" How?

Third problem:
Does "technique" function independently of "skill?" Can we provide any evidence or examples of how?

Fourth problem:
Can technique be trained independently from skill, and does proficiency in a technique outweigh overall skill?

Fifth problem:
In the final analysis, what is the most effective method for achieving overall ability? Should we focus on developing skill or technique in lieu of attributes or should we focus on attributes in lieu of skill? OR, should we focus on both and accept well-roundedness over specificity?

Am I leaving anything out?

Red Rum

That is not the 'under pressure' I was talking about. Of course you have to learn moves, but they should be applied in feeding techniques and in sparring. If you aren't doing this now, you will be very shortly

And if you went to places like Croydon, Beckenham, Ealing, Epsom, Sutton, Tooting or Catford you would never even question the notion of padwork

Because wing chun wasn't designed for sparring. It is majoritively a close quarter art. This is why people do JKD and why Bruce changed wing chun.
In Kamon we use a lot of boxing with a very loose interpretation of the wing chun footwork, and I wouldn't really classify it as wing chun

Er, have you actually done any feeding techniques? And against a higher sash? At low level, you are learning your way around a punch and building up your movement

You should be doing this in your drills. Or against pads.

Anyone who trains in an art like MT, boxing, BJJ, should do it this way. I know people who go 100 mph during a spar and don't really get anything from it.
We again, do this in Kamon
Getting fully padded up is not that great. Its nice having a bit of protection, but I have seen people get padded up like 'Its a Knockout' and you can't really get any power or movement. Which makes it unrealistic.


A woman (with skill) elbowing me in the head will take me out.
Training on a real person will develop better accuracy than a pad!
But yes pad training is important too, which is why WE DO IT...

Everytime....
No, that isn't what I said. I just said that it would be a mismatch. For every punch that he got in, I would be coming in with a whole load more weight.
Kevin Chan had a very short spar with me at Croydon and because of my range, I found that I had a good advantage. It meant that he had to work hard to get in close. Whereas if he had been bigger, he wouldn't have needed to. In wing chun, he can take control of my arms from a long range, stick and come in. With gloves on, under boxing rules, you can't do this. So you are left with the problem of the bigger opponent

Intermediate is usually around Red 2 and above
I would strongly suggest that you ask Kevin Chan the questions you asked on here. I would bet money on the fact that he will say that the grading syllabus has changed to accomodate more sparring.

Red Rum

Let me put it this way...
My training partner (and instructor at Kamon) has pretty much the same skill level as myself, yet I am a foot taller than him.
Due to my extra weight, I am slower, he is faster. Yet I hit with more power
In wing chun, we use the moves that work for our size, but ultimately, he will get attacks in that will stop me, and so will I.
The power and the speed do not matter as much with this kind of fighting.
ie. a kid could chop me in the throat and drop me. If he swung a punch in during a spar, it wouldn't do much

Grixti

I think you kind of missed my points a bit Red Rum.

Now, we do do pad work at Kamon but it is mainly chain punching up and down the room - this is not the padwork i am talking about. We have also started doing a few simple boxing drills on pads - this also is not really what i am talking about. Im not saying i dont agree with these training methods i think we should do more of them but UNDER PRESSURE.

If you watched the link i gave you of the Muay Thai fighter you would see that the trainer was padded up and the practicioner wasnt - this is what i meant by fully padded up. This way one person can practice moves with a lot of power but they have to get their timing right and avoid swings etc. from the padder.

So here are two methods of training that i suggest that might clarify my points:

1. We could have someone who is padded up (like in the Muay Thai Gym) and you have to throw out Wing Chun combinations on him e.g. your moving around he will shout "3 chain punches" and you throw him 3 chain punches, then he might swing for you and shout "elbows" at that point you get inside his guard and elbow. I think you get the idea. This way the student is improving timing and getting tired out because of the power of the hits.

2. Another way would be light sparring interprated for Wing Chun. Here we could have two people who take turns attacking eachother. This would be at a slow pace to start with. One person will throw in a punch or kick and the other has to counter and follow up. This could get more and more complex and the speed would be increased. It would probably also be a good idea to wear MMA gloves and head guards. This way the person intecepting an attack has to read whether the guy is going to punch right, punch left, kick, grab etc. then take the advantage, follow up and maybe takedown.

Maybe you do these things in these "intermediate classes" but i have never seen them done myself.

Basically what im trying to say is whats the point learning a few boxing hits one day, then doing some chain punches the next (all on pads), when you can practice using them in unison WITH POWER AND UNDER PRESSURE.

I want to be able to practice my Wing Chun in a situation that is most like a real fight (i have to say it again - with power under pressure). And i think a lot of people will agree with me that this is one thing a lot of Wing Chun clubs lack. Do you see what i mean Red Rum?

Ghost

You are wise beyond your training time. For combat training, which is what you want, then this type of training, as well as other stuff, is ideal and can be done from virtually day 1.

Padwork done where the padman attacks at random allows you to build up reflexes for defense and the stimulus to counter. To counter hard and fast.
With a good padman he wont even tell you what to counter with, he will catch it on the pads, or give you a trigger such as holding the pad in a certain way.
Good padwork will mix all this up, as you saw in the link you put up the padman was thrown by the fighter and he had to block kicks and so on. This builds a good reactive fighter that can counter hard and fast.

Its by no chance that the combative systems use this type of padwork or very similar for training, it works. Its not something one style owns, i hate notions of that, its just a way to use pads that anyone can use.

In my opinion you are just doing the wrong martial art for what you want. You should be doing something like JKD, MT, boxing etc. It will just suit your mindset better. All the things you are saying point that way.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

Red Rum

All I would say is that you are training at the wrong Kamon classes for this. The classes I train at train light sparring, heavy sparring, padwork (under pressure) and more.

I have trained and train at Muay Thai, boxing, BJJ and karate clubs and have to say that sparring under pressure is okay, but isn't really suitable for a streetfight. It doesn't mean that they don't work, only that if you spar with a person, 70% of the time, they will have sparred as well or at least know how to throw a punch from distance...

In wing chun we shut the person down and fight them on our terms. It takes time to practice this but it does work.
Grixti - I strongly suggest you attend the Archway demo that is coming up. Ask Sifu these questions and he will give you an honest and fair answer in person.

My other point is that people who join wing chun as beginners do not want to be drilled into intensive padwork or spar. If people want to go fight in the UFc then yeah they can train like that. I do that on a semi professional basis and train every day (even with work, hence the 'semi'). People who are past the age of 30 can't really handle that kind of training on a regular basis
That is why they have MMA gyms. If you went into a martial arts school and they started hitting you (even with gloves) and pushing you around, you wouldn't come back
You learn an art first, and then train it intensively

Ghost

Can you expand on this?

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related