Wu v Chan 1954

The following typical threads that plague martial arts sites will get moved here if not just deleted: 1 - My style is better than Your style" - 2 - "Internal & External" - 3 - Personal attacks - 4 - Threads that start well, but degenerate into a spiral of nonsense.

Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Greg J on Sat Nov 07, 2015 11:35 pm

Many of you may have already seen this video, which claims was between Chan Hak Fu (陳克夫) from White Crane style (Pak Hok Pai) and Wu Gongyi ( 吳公儀) from Wu Tai Chi Ch'uan. Given that these two masters were (I'm assuming) highly trained in their respective arts, why does it look like they are slap boxing?



Best,
Greg
Greg J
Anjing
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:59 pm

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby littlepanda on Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:16 am

Look at the huge crowd. When you are under pressure, your internal power vanishes and you always resort to caveman's fighting style.
littlepanda
Anjing
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2015 2:40 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby GrahamB on Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:34 am

... Because their techniques were too deadly for the ring!

(Was that the right punchline?)
"When I argue with reality I lose, but only 100% of the time". Blogs: Tai Chi Notebook http://www.taichinotebook.wordpress.com BJJ Notebook: http://Bjjnotebook.com
User avatar
GrahamB
Great Old One
 
Posts: 10803
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:30 pm

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Strange on Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:02 am

"...2 and a half...."
天官指星 单对月 风摆荷叶 影成双
i said slowly and evenly; i did not say weakly
User avatar
Strange
Great Old One
 
Posts: 4585
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:33 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby dspyrido on Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:23 am

Greg J wrote:Given that these two masters were (I'm assuming) highly trained in their respective arts, why does it look like they are slap boxing?


Because they were taught and believe in the power of haymakers, did not practise shuajiow or chinna properly and hardly sparred.
User avatar
dspyrido
Wuji
 
Posts: 1972
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:03 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby wayne hansen on Sun Nov 08, 2015 11:56 am

I have said this before
The police told them at the last minute that due to the betting on the fight they were not allowed to win loose or draw
The police knew they could not control the crowd
So they just mucked around
In the 70's chan had his school around the corner from our TST school
We fought his students many times and he produced some good fighters
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
wayne hansen
Wuji
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:52 pm

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby klonk on Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:27 pm

wayne hansen wrote:I have said this before
The police told them at the last minute that due to the betting on the fight they were not allowed to win loose or draw
The police knew they could not control the crowd
So they just mucked around
In the 70's chan had his school around the corner from our TST school
We fought his students many times and he produced some good fighters


I lack your personal perspective, only having seen the video (many times). Without putting too fine a point on it, that story sounds like a masterpiece of face saving. Now then, face-saving is an art I appreciate and even collaborate with sometimes. It is culturally appropriate and everyone knows it for what it is. A simpler explanation is that after the fact, that school thought it might be a good time to work a bit more on some concepts not emphasized adequately for some lesser purposes such as a ring fight, though entirely appropriate for true martial training and so on and you get the drift... :D

Best wishes,
Cyniklonk.
User avatar
klonk
Great Old One
 
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 11:46 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby wayne hansen on Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:10 pm

Chan taught very slowly
I knew students that had been with him a long time and only knew the 6 strength Kune
Like I said he had some good fighters who fought every style that was in Sydney at the time
They may have been good street fighters the day they walked into his school
In the 70's Kung fu was the go for street fighters much like mma today
The story about the betting was well known in the Kung fu community in the 70's in both hk and Taiwan
Like everything you wernt present for take it with a grain of salt
I know people with big reps today who when you were there at the time you know just arnt true
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
wayne hansen
Wuji
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:52 pm

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby liokault on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:27 pm

wayne hansen wrote:We fought his students many times and he produced some good fighters



Because, after this embarrassing face losing farce, they actually started sparring with gloves and force.

The video clearly shows two people who are either really inept or have never sparred, getting a shock when they start to spar.
liokault
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:00 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Ah Louis on Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:33 pm

I going with this is what happens when you believe your own B.S. It's far too easy to talk clever and dance pretty, enjoying the adulation of your fans who are calling you sifu. Oh what a joy, convincing people and yourself you know something when you don't. Must be tough to believe your own hype losing sight of reality and actually be delusional enough to take a fight. A fight that results in exposing you as a fraud to the world for ever.
Last edited by Ah Louis on Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ah Louis

 

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby wuwei on Mon Nov 09, 2015 11:51 pm

liokault wrote:
wayne hansen wrote:We fought his students many times and he produced some good fighters



Because, after this embarrassing face losing farce, they actually started sparring with gloves and force.

The video clearly shows two people who are either really inept or have never sparred, getting a shock when they start to spar.


True. People always want to focus on the negative things, how bad their performances were….Instead, we can look at it as a great valuable lesson to them, and how they improved their game afterwards. I also heard that the son of Wu Gong Yi, Wu Da Kui was a good fighter too. Presumably a happy ending to this embarrassing episode?
wuwei
Anjing
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 10:26 pm
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Bao on Tue Nov 10, 2015 3:49 am

Greg J wrote: why does it look like they are slap boxing?


Restricted rules set. Western boxing was an "in" thing. The audience wanted a boxing match. Only western boxing rules, nothing else allowed. Even the kicks you see was prohibited.

The people who arranged it wanted a match for 6 rounds. They were told they must last. Also consider that Wu was about 60 years old and Chan in his 30s, so Chan must take it easy. The arrangers, and as said, the police, had interests from betting. This was also a reason they wanted a long match. But the match was stopped after two rounds, due to one of them hurting his arm.

They can't keep their guards up, so they probably both sucked as fighters (or maybe it was about looking bold and brave?) But still the reasons above explains why it looks a certain way and why they issue single strikes and why no one tries to just run the other one down.

Apparently Dong Yingye was furious after watching the match and told Wu that he was a disgrace and that he knew nothing about Taiji.

liokault wrote:, after this embarrassing face losing farce, they actually started sparring with gloves and force.


Again, it was a western boxing rules set. The boxing the Chinese knew about was older western boxing. The glove thing was not something they didn't consider because it hadn't caught up with them. To most people's knowledge western boxing meant a bare knuckle fight.

Ah Louis wrote:Oh what a joy, convincing people and yourself you know something when you don't. Must be tough to believe your own hype losing sight of reality and actually be delusional enough to take a fight. A fight that results in exposing you as a fraud to the world for ever.


It's an unfair comment regardless how bad you think about this match. Again, they were not allowed to use any style knowledge as throws, knees, elbows etc. If you are going to expose some one as fraud, you need to set him free and let him show what he can and allow him to use his skill set.
Last edited by Bao on Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:00 am, edited 2 times in total.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5419
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby liokault on Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:08 am

Bao wrote:
Greg J wrote: why does it look like they are slap boxing?


Restricted rules set. Western boxing was an "in" thing. The audience wanted a boxing match. Only western boxing rules, nothing else allowed. Even the kicks you see was prohibited.

The people who arranged it wanted a match for 6 rounds. They were told they must last. Also consider that Wu was about 60 years old and Chan in his 30s, so Chan must take it easy. The arrangers, and as said, the police, had interests from betting. This was also a reason they wanted a long match. But the match was stopped after two rounds, due to one of them hurting his arm.

They can't keep their guards up, so they probably both sucked as fighters (or maybe it was about looking bold and brave?) But still the reasons above explains why it looks a certain way and why they issue single strikes and why no one tries to just run the other one down.

Apparently Dong Yingye was furious after watching the match and told Wu that he was a disgrace and that he knew nothing about Taiji.

liokault wrote:, after this embarrassing face losing farce, they actually started sparring with gloves and force.


Again, it was a western boxing rules set. The boxing the Chinese knew about was older western boxing. The glove thing was not something they didn't consider because it hadn't caught up with them. To most people's knowledge western boxing meant a bare knuckle fight.

Ah Louis wrote:Oh what a joy, convincing people and yourself you know something when you don't. Must be tough to believe your own hype losing sight of reality and actually be delusional enough to take a fight. A fight that results in exposing you as a fraud to the world for ever.


It's an unfair comment regardless how bad you think about this match. Again, they were not allowed to use any style knowledge as throws, knees, elbows etc. If you are going to expose some one as fraud, you need to set him free and let him show what he can and allow him to use his skill set.



The fight looked the way it looked, because the fighters sucked, because the fighters didnt train proplerly.

Anything else is making excuses.
liokault
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:00 am

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Bao on Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:26 am

liokault wrote:The fight looked the way it looked, because the fighters sucked, because the fighters didnt train proplerly.
Anything else is making excuses.


No. Can't agree with that. It looked the way it looked because they sucked, and because of restricted rules and demands from the people who arranged it. No excuses for sucking, but IMO it would be more interesting to see them suck with other rules, maybe just like an ordinarie sanda match.
Last edited by Bao on Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5419
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Wu v Chan 1954

Postby Bao on Tue Nov 10, 2015 5:02 am

A quite good detailed analysis... From Kungfu mag forum, 2003...

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/sho ... post261824
I will address some issues as to "why this sucked."

1. Fighters were knocked off balance and frequently. What this means is no experience in yielding or rooting. Watch a boxing match. Opponents are VERY infrequently knocked off balance when you compare shots that knock them off balance with shots that land and don't. Don't tell me I "don't understand." Being off balance is bad whether you are boxing or playing soccer. It's fundamental to forceful, useful movements.

2. The fighters were frequently thrown off balance by their own movements. What this means is--no experience in yielding or rooting AND bad footwork. It also has something to do with....

3. Rotational Movements were too large. I do not mean that twisting existed and it shouldn't have, or that rotational movements existed and that that concept is bad. What I mean is that the movements discribed a path that was too long about the axes. A large rotation is a slow rotation. A slow rotation has NO impact. Every rotational movement in a combat art/sport is small. And the better you get, the smaller those movements become, to a biomechanical limit. When wrestlers first learn to hip throw, they make a big slow clumsy step around and throw the partner. As they improve they make a very small foot change that is as clean as a pirouette called a backstep that allows them to move into the throw much more quickly. Another example is a boxer's hook. Everybody who starts learning this punch almost invariably throws a looper like a half-drunk frat boy. As you get better, the movement becomes tighter and tighter until it becomes sharp and has pop.

4. Pushed punches and kickes. Punches and kicks were pushed rather than fired and returned. The difference between pushing and striking a heavy bag is obvious. A pushed punch or kick makes the bag swing. A properly thrown punch or kick causes it to fold over. Don't tell me "internal/external." You want to hurt the other guy, not push him around. Maybe if you're doing some esoteric internal organ thing I've never seen, but these guys were just punching and kicking (sort of) Pushing does not hurt the other guy, leaves you open for too long, and has a tendency to overbalance causing you to make BAD corrective actions, like sticking your head out to over compensate for poor body structure.

5. Flustered when actually kind of hit by something that almost had enough pop to do something maybe. Inexperience shows.

This can all be summed up: Those of us who have actually fought and watched real fighters fight saw this and said "The biomechanics here were all wrong."

I don't care what style you do, you can't ignore that we're all built basically the same, so offbalance movement comes from IMPROPER movement, regardless what label you attach.

Bottom line was it was inexperience that made both these guys suck. Maybe they're great teachers. But they're Z class fighters. That's not anything to be ashamed of. I'm not knocking them. I'm knocking the people that think something mystical and esoteric is going on because they're masters, or that "it's SUPPOSED to look like this," because they're brainwashed.

If you find anything worthy of note in this fight other than:

1. At least they had the balls to step up.

And

2. Here's how NOT to look,

You need a reality check.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5419
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Next

Return to Been There Done That

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest