Internal Arts guy dealing with a shoot

[chris davis 200]

hi all,

short clip of Su Dong Chen dealing with a shoot.

http://www.ma-design.biz/master%20su%20_leg_tackle.WMV

your thoughts??

Chris

[Ahoym8e]

Bad Shoot. Left himself open to be reversed.

Countered nicely (level change by the defender). Nice frilly fancy stuff to finish too.

[Ronson]

Shoot was half-assed with no real intention/commitment of making it happen.

The video is what it is - a pretty demo. Shite, even our shooting drills have more gusto.

[chris davis 200]

cheers guys.

if you watch su - you see him slap the spine of the attacker while changing level and hooking the front foot, then he reaches round and grabs the chin of the attack while sweeping out his foot. as the attcker turns onto his back, su kneels onto his head / neck and retreats away from his legs while controlling one.

Although the shoot was quite Lame i think the responce was quite nice - not 'stop start' not 'flowery' and not fancy - just straight forward.

Su Dong Chen won a good few Full contact tourneys and was involved in alot of street gangland stuff (he has ALOT of scars from knife fights) - basically all with internal Chinese arts - so i respect his skill level alot.

chris

[James Lee]

Over on Sonnon's forum a few of Su's guys were comparing Su and Scott in their fighting style. Yeah, the shot was bad, but like Scott says "good movement is good movement." You can see that Su's bad ass.

[EmptyneSs]

yeah alotta people might come here and say negative things about this guy, but wether or not the shoot sucked doesnt really matter......that guy still has skill and i wouldnt wanna mess with him .

[Tom Yum]

What I liked was that Su (the defender?) let the guy shoot randomly, from a moving position. They weren't in static stances and the guy shooting in changed legs a little to position himself and went as he pleased, good set up.

I also liked how Su changed levels and stance to improve his leverage against the shoot and how he threw a palm strike at the guys neck? on the way down.

What I did not like was how the guy shooting in did not drive through with his legs. A real shoot would have ended up with Su and the guy in a low clinch, perhaps with the guy shooting in stunned from that palm to the neck, but unlikely KOd. The shooter's momentum would earn him an underhook around Su since Su changed levels with both guys in deep, sprawl-like stances.

What would happen thereafter would depend on the experience of the grappler and Su's experience

Su might knee the guy or try to pull him off balance; the shooter might try to get ahold of Su's closest leg or lift him.

[James Lee]

Okay but my problem with all of these type of criticisms is that the criticisizer really isnt happy unless the shot works. A "good shot" IS by definition one that WORKS! Anything that doesn't work is a crappy shot, in other words. I like how Matt Thorton described it that there ain't no defense against a well applied technique. It looks to me like Su is demonstrating good technique against poor technique. Does that mean he's going to win a UFC? Probably not. But it certainly means that he's probably teaching sufficient defensive capabilities to his students against the street attacker. Scott Sonnon described it this way in a thread over on his forum that you can't stop an opponent's technique when it is perfect, you can only counter it. It looks like Su is stopping a poor technique. I dont think its a valid argument to say, "well Su didn't stop a perfect technique." You can't. You can only counter it (like say, if Su wrapped on a guillotine and dropped into guard, as the shot penetrated and drove him back and down.) That would be a nice demo too, but I dont think its the same KIND of demonstration (it would be a counter-technique, not a stop-technique.)

[Tom Yum]

Su had great technique and I think this would work well against some joe trying to tackle him after a confrontation. That matters for SD training.

Fortunately, we don't have to defend ourselves against Randy Couture clones, so I think it would be legit

[IPON]

A "good shot" IS by definition one that WORKS! Anything that doesn't work is a crappy shot, in other words.

Not exactly, a good shot refers to proper execution of the shot not the success. A person can shoot perfect, but not be successful.


Chris BTW nice clip

[James Lee]

We'll have to disagree there. From coaches I respect like Steve Maxwell, Scott Sonnon and Tony Cecchine, a perfect shot is always successful. Perhaps you look at a shot as mere technical accuracy. Those guys look at shots from a timing, distance, angle, opportunity perspective and dont see technique as separate from it.

[IPON]

We'll have to disagree there.

We can certainly agree to disagree. But I think it depends on your definition, by your statement a sloppy shot can be perfect if it is successful. You could be 100lbs and shoot perfectly on a 400lb man. You were successful with the shot though you didn't attain the goal... a TD. Regarding the coaches, well I am glad you hold them in high esteem, but on this topic they are equally as wrong if you are interpreting their statements correctly.

[James Lee]

No, you're misreading me. I said that a perfect shot cannot be countered. I didn't say that a perfect shot was the one that works. 2 different things. And as far as whose opinion I'll consider, I'll stick with a USA sombo coach and world sombo champ (Sonnon), a 2X World BJJ champ (Maxwell) and the father of Catch (Cecchine.)

[jubaji]

hi all,

short clip of Su Dong Chen dealing with a shoot.

http://www.ma-design.biz/master%20su%20_leg_tackle.WMV

your thoughts??

Chris

Performance art

[IPON]

James: We can agree to disagree. I do not want to waste Chris's post with a tennis match. I did not misinterpret what you wrote. Also, no need to drop titles I also know very well the coaches you are referring to I simply don't agree with thier opinion on this subject (at least based on your interpretation). Regarding the post, we are discussing somone with a poorly executed shot, In you comment you do state "works":


"Okay but my problem with all of these type of criticisms is that the criticisizer really isnt happy unless the shot works. A "good shot" IS by definition one that WORKS! Anything that doesn't work is a crappy shot, in other words."

The criticisims of the clip were not based on the unsuccessful completion of the shot rather poor execution. So again, if you say a perfect shot is one that cannot be countered then you can argue that a poor shot can be considered "perfect" if somone cannot counter it (which also strongly implies that it works). I understand what the oaches are sayiong but I am not so sure that you are interpreting correctly.

I agrred with your initial post regarding the clip, I just think you were not reading people's respones about he shot correctly.

Again, we can agree to disagree .... no problem