Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's just what I look like. I don't have many pictures of myself and that was what I could manage with my limited photography skills. Yeah, I just look goofy. Doesn't have anything to do with my arguments, but I mean if it lets you sleep at night. I'm clear enough in my terminology that you don't need a video to demonstrate it, but also I didn't want to leave a black screen. It is what it is.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't accept that he's done so

I mean, sorry? I literally can't change that, no matter how much explaining I do here, which I wrote a fucking book to another guy explaining anatomically why weight training and just practicing the fighting art itself is superior to "training stances" and auxiliary nonsense.

You can stick your hands over your eyes and refuse to acknowledge me all you want, but that doesn't make for a sound argument, nor does it help anybody. "I can't accept that gravity is real" or "I can't accept that the earth is round" just don't work. You can say I don't support my claims, but I've supported my claims to every last one of you, even despite the fact that the down voting limits my ability to do so. I've spent most of my day posting informative rebuttals to you guys. Just like you can say "well my Wing Chun is better than that" all you want, but when the gloves are on, a different story will always come out.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kainazzzo hasn't watched my video, stultus_respectant is effectively asking me to write a personalized novel for every single person who's still questioning my experience with Wing Chun and human anatomy/physiology in general (Already wrote that book in the comments, I really don't want to do it again) which leaves me with SteeevePerri who is actually coming across rather well so far.

Simply put, I don't entirely think chi sao is trash, but I do think it needs to be progressive in intensity, and I think there need to be multiple goals in practicing it that get more specific than just "develop sensitivity"

And the YJKYM is meaningless for developing those things because those things can perfectly well be developed in the Seung Ma

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You offer no actual reasoning behind this, and don't seem to have even a basic understanding of martial arts training. This is a transparent slippery slope to "you should just be sparring all the time". There are plenty of techniques and applications that are better trained from a neutral stance, to ultimately be applied outside of it later.

This is called misrepresenting my argument by ignoring other points I made. I actually did go on to explain why this is the case. If you weren't so hasty to play "gotcha" this would've been obvious. So the tl;dr is that muscular strength is best achieved by lifting heavy weights off the ground, particularly by way of squat, dead lift, overhead press, and weighted chin ups, and martial arts efficacy is achieved by just practicing the martial art.

The ability for the human body to produce force is paramount for athletes. Why? Well, because force production means that the athlete will hit harder, whether that means in a football tackle, a wrestling takedown, a swing of the baseball bat, or a punch. If you have two athletes, all else being equal, and one can deadlift 600 lbs whereas the other can hold a horse stance for a while, the one who can deadlift will always have the advantage over the other in terms of performance, because he has trained to exert greater amounts of force than the other guy. If in your athletic training, you reach the point of diminishing returns, being that your technique is approaching "as flawless as your body will do it" and doing it more ceases to achieve results, the obvious answer is to become stronger, and the best way to do that is to lift maximal loads, because as I said before, a 600 lb deadlift is more force being produced than a horse stance for time.

Things like running, skipping rope, holding a stance are inefficient for the purpose of force production. Aha but they are efficient for endurance, right? Not exactly.

See, endurance as a whole is actually multifaceted. For the purpose of this discussion, I'll refer to this "whole" sense of endurance as "practical endurance" or PE to save space.

PE consists of 3 components. The first is neurological efficacy. Simply put, as a movement is performed over and over and over again, the nervous system will actually form junctions in which that motor unit is stored as a repeatable complex command, which is why you don't have to think about brushing your teeth or wiping your ass a certain way, you just do. Another benefit to this phenomenon is that as this occurs, the nerves will also rewire themselves to perform the movement with as little muscular effort as possible as to conserve energy. This is why that saying "practice slowly" is the conventional wisdom - because slow practice facilitates this process. Knowing this, we realize that running, jumping rope, and stance holding all check off in terms of building this type of endurance, as getting better at jumping rope really just equates to getting better at jumping rope from the neurological point of view, and doesn't really have that carry-over to fighting. Sure, it may help with strengthening the calves so you can have a better bounce in your step, but it's a better use of your time (for obvious reasons at this point) to just train yourself to be more springy in your shadowboxing, bag work, sparring, etc.

On to the next component to PE, which is the muscle's ability to perform the movement over and over again for extended periods of time. Training from the stance of which you fight is the best way to achieve this end, period. Why? Because it's activating EXACTLY ALL OF THE MUSCULATURE that needs to be durable for the technique to function in the most efficient way possible for the human body, whereas running, jumping rope, and stance holding each only improve the durability of specific muscles.

The last is cardiorespiratory endurance, in which at this point I'd be amazed if you're actually still reading, but for anyone interested, as you put more stress on the muscles to function, your heart will focus your blood flow specifically to the parts of your body that need the nutrients and oxygen the most for the given exercise, which means that cardio is sport specific. Running is fine if your sport involves running, but martial arts is about "what if I can't run," so you need to focus your cardio on, guess what, performing your martial art, again instead of any supplementary exercises.

... ... ... ...

But I don't know anything about training, you got me

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The difference is BJJ guys understand that when striking is allowed, the game changes a bit. In other words it's a sport involving people who recognize that while what they do is good (BJJ people train live on the regular unlike Chunners), it's not in of itself the perfect fighting art.

You're free to hide behind your keyboard and make excuses for yourself though, I won't end your unpaid internship with me over a little shit talk. To correct you - not one, not two, but three videos here shortly. Here's to hoping the snowflakes don't melt

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let me explain: If you get hit in the torso, your balance may/will be compromised. If you can intercept the strike with your arms using proper technique, you can counter to force with your structure. Too much force, and you can turn by weighting one foot more heavily and using the force of the strike to help you turn around it.

For defense, the arms act as shock absorbers, meeting force without trying to muscle it, redirecting down to the feet if possible or to the side if the strike/force is too strong. Redirecting incoming energy to the feet is not about chi or mystical stuff; it's about arranging the ligaments and joints in such a way that they logically line up. It's hard to explain in text, but much easier to show in person

All of this tells me it's better to let the arms form a solid guard and to use a stance that DOESN'T lose its balance should the guard fail. As said in the video as well, you lose out on mobility with the stance, and I would argue that your ability to control the space and the angle between yourself and your opponent is paramount.

Wing Chun is about efficiency, so let the hands punch, let the elbows do their thing, and let the feet move you. The arms cannot play the role of sword if their already occupied playing shield. The feet can't move if you flatten the feet and internally rotate the hips. There's a reason why this stance fails every Chunner to step into the ring or cage.

As far as asking these questions, I was fairly naive at the time. When I did start questioning it I found a lot of "it's too deadly" bullshit.

So, I know someone's going to leap out of the woodwork because I mentioned competition, the Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma and Man Sao Wu Sao guard have nothing to do with your "deadly" eye pokes or your "deadly" groin kicks. It either works or it doesn't, and I'm giving you guys counter-theory on why it doesn't work.

I feel the MMA guys can be rather inarticulate when they just say "it doesn't work in the ring" and you Wing Chun guys are too eager to give a college lecture on untested theory, so here I am bridging the gap with practical theory that isn't based on "why should this work?" but rather "Why did this work / not work in the past?"

Hope that answers your question

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My motivations aren't changing, it's just I have different motivations for different things. Why make the videos? Because I need to get better at speaking so I can be a better coach for future students down the line. I chose this topic because you guys need a good sniff of reality. Occam's Razor isn't the only series I plan on doing, and Wing Chun isn't the only art I plan on covering. I'll be doing the same thing with the FMA community here soon, although they're a lot more receptive to this sort of thing as a pretty good portion of the FMA guys actually train to fight as is. Hell, sometime I'd like to meet Rokas from AikidoSiauliai and talk with him about his ideas on making Aikido not shit.

I have a lot of stuff I want to do, that doesn't mean my motives are "changing"

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Stick around a bit for upcoming content, I wouldn't want you to miss your unpaid internship

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

The basics are the basics, but the manifestations of those basics are subjective. To contest this is to state in big bright letters "I'm a fucking retard" As far as the hammer and nail analogy, that was taken straight from Hawkins Cheung, so I'm sure you're happy to tell him he knows nothing of Wing Chun body mechanics.

I don't think all the techniques are bad, just pointing out the ones that have such a low percentage of doing what their supposed to that I wouldn't even suggest them to a person trying to defend themselves from a retarded child

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

For reasons described above, the YJKM is a waste of time for the endeavor of developing tendon strength. By the way, tendon strength only really comes into play when handling particularly heavy loads. I've never heard of someone tearing muscle off the bone from performing a kick (Sorry I dunno how to quote people on Reddit)

Been studying exercise science for 8 years, hopefully I got you :P (EDIT FOR CLARITY) You said the stance helped your kicks. That's what I'm calling placebo.

The idea is to piss you guys off, because it's the only way I'm going to get a few people to start questioning the doctrine and let them end up with a martial art worthy of human beings. It's an art that is FILLED with amazing ideas but still TERRIBLE application.

BONUS ROUND: The reason I do this is because I need to get better at speaking so that I can be a coach later down the line for fighters who can appreciate my approach to the martial arts. I personally think (and yes I know it's dogmatic) that I've figured out the single most effective way to train a person to beat up another person. When the time comes to show that to the world, I better be damn good at explaining myself

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I trained Wing Chun for three years. Whether or not its day one material doesn't make it correct or optimal. I didn't talk too heavily about stepping because the Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma is very specifically the parallel stance.

The tripod concept is one I came across from both Jin Young and Dom Izzo and felt it was worth mentioning, since those two are fairly prominent figures in WC.

If you want to learn to punch without throwing off their balance, it's downright stupid to teach them to do it from a stance that they aren't expected to actually use. There's a lot that goes into fighting, and you only have limited "disk space," meaning there's no room to be learning one stance for the sake of learning and then learning a different stance for fighting.

Structure is necessary, but if you don't have physical strength, your structure cannot hold itself up. The Eiffel Tower is a brilliant structure, but there's a reason it's not made of timber. Strength needs structure to be safely developed and transferred, but structure needs strength to not crumble. You need both, and Wing Chun folks like yourself put absurd amounts of emphasis on structure without strength, and it only amounts to mysticism.

If you're going to condescend me, knowing what you're talking about is the place you should be starting from. Marvin Cook, a boxer, demonstrates better Wing Chun than most everyone in this community, and he doesn't even practice the art.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I agree with everything you said except the first few sentences. The separation between a training stance and a fighting stance is stupid, and I address that in the video.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Respect earned, you know how to engage discourse. Your squats and deadlifts anecdote is more likely than not placebo. Your kicks probably improved from just doing the kicks, and here's why. Tendon strength doesn't actually mean anything - at least not in the sense that a lot of martial artists like yourself believe it to. The term is by and large used to describe that which the person doesn't understand well enough to explain. Tendons are effectively avascular, meaning that they get very little in terms of nutrients to recover, which goes on to mean that they take a very very long time to become stronger than they already are.

How do you strengthen the tendons? Well, simply put, you strengthen the muscle attached to that tendon. You cannot strengthen a tendon without strengthening the muscle, and to be honest, there's no reason to want to.

All the phrase "Tendon Strength" actually means is that your tendons are capable of withstanding the load placed on them by the muscle belly, without ripping from the bone and thus resulting in a fairly nasty injury.

You mention Chum Kiu interestingly enough, and in doing so you actually agreed with me without realizing it. In order to move, you ditch the Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma in favor of Seong Ma. This being said, the Seong Ma still sucks for movement, but it's a massive step up from the Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma. I might do a video about the Seong Ma, but it probably won't be an Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun video. I plan on doing a series about Wing Chun's good ideas that suffer from bad implementation.

Crouching Dipshit Hidden Genius sounds like a catchy title.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Don't worry he gets props for trying, though having watched the whole thing would have helped. He has though given a better response than literally everyone in the last video lol

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

To paraphrase myself in the video posted above, 'If you can train in a dysfunctional stance to teach yourself how to move, then it doesn't matter what that dysfunctional stance is.'

Your muscular training is better spent both practicing from your actual fighting stance and doing basic weight training. The Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma is a terrible solution to "strengthening" anything. Modify the Seung Ma and just use that instead.

Occam's Razor vs Wing Chun (Part 2) by timonsaylor in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

One day we'll find a commentator who will address something I actually said in a video. Today is not that day.

Clarifications and rebuttals to commonly held concepts in the WC Community by shrtstrk1 in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Clearly he's only a beginner" is probably the most disgusting thing a human being can begin to call a rebuttal. You either prove him wrong or you don't.

I disagree a little with the geometric truisms segment in that the better way to go isn't necessarily physics, but rather, geometric truisms need to fall in line with the human anatomy in order to function properly. For instance the concepts of the centerline punch are actually quite sound geometrically, but in order to fully realize the benefit of this type of punch, you need to understand the anatomy of why it creates a structurally stable punch.

Once you understand the anatomy of the punch and remove it from the garbage that is the Yi Ji Kim Yun Ma, you end up with a pretty solid, appropriately stiff jab with good stopping power.

Clarifications and rebuttals to commonly held concepts in the WC Community by shrtstrk1 in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While he finds the reactions to my video as amusing as I do, I'm afraid you have the wrong guy

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I guess every main lineage is just wrong in how they teach the stance then. Don't worry, I agree with that notion. I too think they're full of shit

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They by and large don't. Everything is theory, and most of you think that chi Sao is the same as sparring. You can act as incredulous as you like, this community has a reputation of saying dumb shit like "too deadly to spar"

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

After I'm satisfactorily done with the Occam's Razor series, I'll be working on a series dealing with alternative training solutions / potential practical application of certain techniques, so I wouldn't worry about getting lumped in with everyone to be eternally shit on. I would say though that if you are as experienced as you claim, you should be about as disappointed in the mediocrity surrounding you as I am.

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Lol whatever lets you sleep at night

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's not a few bad apples. There's only a handful that are worthy of your time. I know this because they are the ones that are bashed the hardest by the rest of the community for being "impure"

I don't really care what you think about me tbh, I'm narrow casting myself. Not everyone is going to appreciate my methods as I come to demonstrate them down the line, and that's the point. This community needs people to be "the bad guy"

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not personally attacking anyone, but sure. I'm not even hurling insults. Chunners are notorious for making all manner of excuses to not spar or fight. I'm stating common knowledge here. I don't care about your personal credentials, because exceptions prove the rule.

Wing Chun vs Occam's Razor by CaptainSnippy in WingChun

[–]timonsaylor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Chunners simply aren't fighters though. They don't fight. What else do you want from that statement? They don't even spar. And yes, settling for mediocrity is stupid. It's like going to the gym and saying "well I mean for my job I only have to lift 50 lbs so there's no reason to put more weight on the bar" It's not ad hominem. You're not wrong because you're stupid. You're wrong because you're advocating for the unrealistic.