Has anyone trained with Vunak lately?

[SamuraiGuy]

samurai guy.....you have 1673 posts to your credit which tells me that you spend more time on your ass typing than you do training.....PFSofPA you have 45 posts .....now i would wager you spend more time in the gym than in front of your pc ........no offence to anyone but name calling over a difference of opinion is not a positive contribution to this forum mr. brewer and i hope you do not support this.

lol and brewer has twice as many posts as me, why arent u knocking him.
You say no offense to anyone but clearly your taking a shot at me.

His posts are usually twice as long as mine too....

I also go to university full time, and work nights, on top of still getting the judo in. On the downtime, 20 mins between class or so, I post on here, excuse me for getting what little more exposure to MA that I can fit into my day.

I thought posting opinions, advice, and answering peoples questions was a decent use of my time. Seems like some people want me to go the way of the Boar though... and I just might. Dicks.

[Aaron04]

SamuraiGuy, this thread was going great until you jumped in. It was all about technique, training methods, tactics, experiences during training and other things that relate to MA, especially as how they apply in a streetfight. I honestly think this is one of the best threads I've seen on this forum, and not because I started it. Then along comes you, insulting others because they don't totally match up with your thinking. Have you ever trained with someone who completely agreed with everything you thought? I haven't yet, and I've trained with a lot of people. Some of them are quite good as well

Earlier in this thread, I stated that I think that RAT is the best way to deal with a streetfight. An instructor under Vunak disagreed. Did I insult him? Did he insult me? The point is that we are all discussing our theories on fighting, and fights are usually sloppy, so what works in one will often not work in another, but there are a few "core theories" that generally do work in most cases. This is what RAT is based on, and this is also what the flow drill that I posted is based on as well.

Sooo, let's get back to where we were...

[Aaron04]

...Talking about training.

[Aaron04]

Thanks Mike. OK, back to the questions. When it comes to sparring, I've noticed that it seems to be easier to land interceptions when your opponent is not moving. Like before the sparring begins, or when he has not yet gotten ready for a fight, but you know it's going to happen, so you hit first (intercept). In that situation, it almost never fails. But when his hands are up, and he is moving in a stance, I've noticed it is more difficult to intercept for obvious reasons. I think that in that situation, destructions are more appropriate. I pretty much already knew that, but kinda forgot it. I've been very successful intercepting even when the person is in a stance, using footwork, but every so often, someone totally screws it up, and I have to relearn that lesson. Are those your thoughts, that you should plan on a using a destruction as opposed to an interception when he is using footwork, with his hands up? Also, I often will only use the interception when his hands are up when he tries to close the distance on me. I always like to spar way out in long range, so I can see what's coming from a long way off. I prepare for the destruction but will often intercept when he keeps moving forward, without hitting. But in this last case I did that, and my interceptions got screwed up. I think that in that case, it's just best to use footwork to keep him away. Would you agree?

Thanks

[SamuraiGuy]

Gonna interject for the last time here.

For the editors notes, If you saw fit to put em in there, thats fine with me, I'm leaving what I said, because if I thought it at the time, it should remain there.

To the rest of you, I dont really know what your problem was, you assumed I was bashing everything you believe in, and I think Mike was the only one who got that I was just discussing it.

You've all gone on about how you want to discuss techniques,strategies, and that, thats exactly what I was doing with him. In one of the posts he says he didnt think he was being insulted, he wasnt, and I'm sure if he was he can fight his own E-Battles.

Third, I think its quite ironic that you are all jumping on me for being blind to the views of others, and saying that I need to train with or listen to people who disagree with me sometimes. As far as I'm concerned, thats exactly what I'm doing, and you guys jumped on me for disagreeing me.

I was doing what your preaching, and you are doing to me, what you accuse me of doing.

The only person I was hostile too was PFSofPA and you can see at the end of my post being rationale won out. Now just to prove my maturity I'll finish with this, he had it coming, because he started it....

[Aaron04]

Thanks Mike. Every time I feel like I'm getting good, something always seems to go wrong. As far as interceptions go, I'm usually very successful with them. I can almost hit at will, most of the time, regardless of what his footwork is like. I will often use a "test" interception a few times before doing the real thing. But once in a while, every time I go for it, he either destroys it, intercepts it, or closes the distance and opens up with punches or a take down. I get the impression that it's because I'm being too aggressive, and that I should be a little more passive. By aggressive, I mean closing the distance on him, and going for the interception, as opposed to maintaining distance, and waiting for him to step closer, then intercepting.

As far as the jeet tek goes, we never trained it. Both times that I trained with him it was not covered. I think the reason why is because he likes the shuffle kick, which seems to accomplish a similar effect. It will stop his advance when it connects, as a jeet tek will, but it also gives you the pain that you need to facilitate the entry, so it seems like killing two birds with one stone. The subject of the jeet tek never came up, so I don't know this for sure, but that's the feeling I get when I think about it.

Sometimes the more I think about it, the more confusing it seems to be. I was often so successful with interceptions, that I rarely used destructions. I could simply shuffle in with a low kick, or an eye jab, and land it. I would often throw a few punches at the face, to get their attention there, then easily land a kick to the groin. But every now and then, that game plan fails catastrophically. The last time it did, I started thinking about using the destructions mainly, and then intercepting when he tries to get closer.

So to sum it up, should I maintain my distance, and then intercept when he moves in, as opposed to me moving closer to him, and then intercepting? Then in the mean time, just rely on destructions? I'm thinking that that's what I'm going to do, the next time I spar, and see how it goes. Unfortunately, I don't have as much sparring time as I used to, so it's difficult to experiment as much as I used to.

Thanks

[Aaron04]

Thanks Mike. When it comes down to it, I used to feel superhuman anyway, lol. I have been able to intercept people who are superior kickboxers literally dozens of times in the same session. The main reason for this is because kickboxers like to fight in kickboxing range, and I always stay out in long range. Then I put in the shuffle before the interception, allowing me to hit them when they felt safe out in long range. That formula has produced almost surreal results at times. But for some reason it sometimes fails against average people once in a while. I tend to think that this happens because I get overconfident and get too aggressive, which results in me moving in on them. Also, many times people will ignore the groin kick that I would have easily landed in a streetfight, which would have of course probably dropped them, and keep moving in on me. For this reason, I've started working the jeet tek into my routine. I usually feel that I don't need it, but once in a while it does seem appropriate, in the aforementioned cases.

I was watching my RAT video recently (the England seminar). I noticed that he said a few things about using interceptions and destructions. He said that for fighters that simply walk up, and get into your face, with their hands down, trying to intimidate you by standing an inch away from you, you should use an interception. Then he said that if his hands are up, in a stance, moving around, and he may possibly be a better kickboxer than you, you should use a destruction. Then he stated that the exception to this rule would be for a person in a stance, who is moving, but not throwing anything. Once he starts to move closer, without throwing, is when you should intercept. That seems to make perfect sense. Is that what you would pretty much recommend as well?

Thanks

[Aaron04]

I agree, it is usually easier to intercept for that very reason. That's why I prefer the interception, and used it much more frequently than the destruction. I only reassessed my strategy when I started having trouble with it.

You mentioned earlier that you like to test an interception to see how they will react. I also like to do that, to throw a long range shot without meaning to hit, just to feel out their response.

That leads to my next question- Feinting. Do you have a certain set of techniques that you like to use for that? I think I remember you posting something that Vunak told you, about throwing a shot, and then faking again within 7 seconds or something like that. Could you please elaborate?

Thanks

[Tant01]

Interesting questions and discussion gentlemen...









Carry on.

[Aaron04]

Yes, very interesting. This thread has turned out much better than I thought it would. A big thank you to Mike.

[Aaron04]

Yes that makes a lot of sense, thanks.

[Aaron04]

We we did a lot of talk about energy drills and their various uses. I was wondering what you think about weapons drills? The only ones I did with Vu were the de-fang drill for knife fighting, and the armora drill, for using a knife as a "force shield" to protect your body from many opponents. Both of those weapons drills were very useful for their intended purposes, defending against mass attack with a blade (armora), and knife on knife fighting (de-fang).

The knife sparring using the de-fanging concept was also awesome for developing attributes for unarmed combat. After sparring knife on knife for a while, when you drop the knives and go back to Phase one RAT sparring (long range), you feel much more confident because you were moving much more and much faster when dealing with your opponent's blade, and so was he in dealing with your blade. The speed of the blade is so fast that avoiding getting hit with it really speeds up your reflexes. After dropping them, and going back to unarmed sparring, everything else seems much slower. That's why I like the de-fang drill, as well as armora.

I have seen him in his videos do other drills as well, ones using sticks and knives, to further develop attributes for unarmed fighting. Things like Sumbrada, numerada, carrenza, and others. Do you feel that those drills are worth learning and training, or are the de-fanging drills alone enough to properly develop these attributes?

Thanks

[Aaron04]

Thanks Mike. Yes that definitely fits in with what I did with Voo. I mainly asked that question because I've seen him do the other weapons drills on his videos. Not just the sparring and de-fanging, but the Sumbrada, Numerada, Carrenza, (spelling?) etc. My main question was do you feel that those drills are worth learning and doing? I tend to think they are a bit antiquated, and that's why we didn't do them when I trained with him, and he just stuck with the de-fanging sparring. I really like the knife sparring, it definitely builds speed, timing, footwork, etc, in addition to learning how to fight with a blade. Of course I always make every effort to avoid getting cut before trying the disarm.

So in a nutshell, would you recommend just sticking with the de-fanging sparring with the stick and knife, or moving onto the other drills as well? I have seen them done on the videos, and honestly they look kinda boring, so I don't really have any interest in doing them unless there is a definite advantage to be gained from doing them.

Thanks

[Aaron04]

Thanks Mike. Just one last question on this subject. When I was referring to weapons training, I was mostly referring to doing it for attributes development relating to empty hand fighting, as opposed to weapons fighting itself. I know that de-fanging is the best way to fight with weapons, and that's the only way I fight with a weapon in a real situation. As far as empty hand attributes development goes, obviously sparring with weapons while de-fanging is the best way, because you are constantly using footwork, being evasive, using body mechanics, etc.

So as far as empty hand attributes development goes, do those other drills help develop that, or should I just stick with the de-fanging sparring?

[Aaron04]

Thanks. I think we got a little too into the weapons aspect there. The main question I had was about weapons training as it relates to developing empty handed fighting attributes, as opposed to weapons themselves. Regarding weapon on weapon fighting, I tend to prefer the 9mm and .40 cal.

So as far as weapons training for strictly unarmed fighting goes, what do you recommend?

Thanks