More than one style

[Vegita]

This has been an on going debate I have with a friend of my, and I want to know what everybody else thinks. Our debate has been: Will knowing more than one 'style' make you a better fighter? My personal belief is that while it is plausible that knowing many diff arts will help you become a better fighter, most of us just do not have the time each art requires. Therefore it is better to stick with one style until you are able to perform the movements in the style (read:able to fight with the style, when it is no longer a style, but an extension of your reflexes) without thinking in a confrontation.
While my friends view is: it is better to study different arts at the same time w/o a devotion to any single art, therefore exposing yourself to different situations. i.e. wingchun for short distance, white crane for long distance, BJJ for ground fighting and such.
My counter to his reasoning is: A) most of us have to work for a living so our practice time is already limited B) just learning one art would take a life time C) therefore, whats the point of learning bits and pieces here and there, after all, your 1 hr a day of BJJ, 1 hr a day of Wing Chun and 1 hr of whitecrane is not going to beat the guy that does 3 hrs a day of BJJ on the ground, because that's the only art he studies, or the Wing chun man in "short distance" who does 3 hrs of wingchun.
Better to just study one art and take them out with your style.

[Atleastimnotyou]

It is my opinion that Wing Chun is all that is needed. I know that most people on here don't agree though. they think you should take wing chun along with bjj.
Wing Chun will work against a white crane guy because in order to hit you, he has to get close. Where wing chun works. Wing chun works against bjj guy because he has to touch you before he tries to take you down. That is where you should "take care" of your opponent.... before he can get you to the ground.

[old jong]

If you really can use Wing Chun as "fighting principles", I dont see why you should crosstrain.You should get to the level when you are very dangerous to approach.Like getting is the striking range of a rattler or something!
We just have to be aware that nobody is perfect.

[Mr. Bao]

Vegita:


Think about studying martial arts like studying in school. In High School you were taught many different subjects and it did not mess you up or confuse you, i hope. The idea of a well rounded martial artists is like trying to be a well rounded educated person. It requires hard work and much time and effort.

But the problem with studying more than one martial arts in our modern time is time and quality. Unless you are full time professional martial artist or a trust fund baby who loves martial arts, the average joe has only the time to devote "quality" work toward one method.

Now if you have the time to study martial arts like we had the time to devote 8 hours or more in High School, I am sure we can study more than one "style."

Realistically speaking, most people do not have the time and if quality is important, than I perfer to work on one method until I gain mastery of it before I start jumping around looking to be complete.

Bao

[anerlich]

It is my opinion that Wing Chun is all that is needed. I know that most people on here don't agree though. they think you should take wing chun along with bjj.

Whereas others, your sifu Carl Dechiara for example (according to red5angel), took taiji, and still others, eg. WT, supplemented with Escrima.

The answer to the question varies from individual to individual and depends on your interests, personal characteristics, and goals.

To settle the argument, I guess you could both train in your chosen methodologies full on for two years, then meet for a death match. The winner could post the result on this forum, to, I'm sure, huge accolades (or maybe OTOH total indifference).

Do what you think is right, and let other people do what they think is right. Only dictators and the crazy demand that everyone agree with them.

[TwoManSaw]

As anerlich says "The answer to the question varies from individual to individual and depends interests, personal characteristics and goals".

I would also add, that it is my opinion that one should train in as many or as few systems as they see fit. My concern with choosing not to train in other systems that might spark your curiosity and excite you. Is that at the end of the day, your Martial training should be fun and it should keep you fresh and thinking. Some people get this from learning one system some from learning many, dont let rigidity become your barrier for self discovery and combat effectiveness.:)

[Sihing73]

Hello,

The question of whether or not to train in more than one style is more complicated than it first appears. One must first consider the reason for training in an additional style. Is it because there is a lacking within your chosen system? Perhaps you have not trained hard enough. Is it because you have an interest in another aspect of fighting which is not emphasized in your system? Perhaps exploration will open your eyes to your own understanding of your chosen system.

People will most likely never agree fully on whether to train in more than one system or not. Part of this is due to the myriad differences between each of us. The argument that we have limited time to train is a valid one. In todays society it is not the quanity which one knows but the quality. The same goes for training in multiple arts. It does not matter the quantity of arts trained, rather it is the quality and understanding of the arts trained which is of importance.

Myself, I have found that exploring other arts has opened my eyes to what is found within Wing Chun. Training in Pekiti Tirsia has improved my understanding of body mechanics and footwork. Some of the sensitivity drills have opened my eyes to various differing energies and allowed me to enhance my Chi Sau.

The key seems to be to obtain a firm and full foundation in your chosen art prior to complicating things further by adding additional things. Just as one can take a Honda Civic and soup it up to create a more powerful and sporty vehicle; one can use the knowledge gained from other arts to soup up ones chosen system. However, just as there are some enhancements which will not work on our Civic, there are some things which may violate the principles of the chosen system. Before one tries to build on the Civic one must fully understand the "foundation" of the base model. Once one does then one can work to enhance the performance. Some of this has to be done by trial and error. Still, one can look to what others have done before you to help find the way. Yet some will be quite happy with the base model and have no desire nor need to change. The same can be said for your chosen system of martial arts. If it meets your needs then why change it?

The founders of Wing Chun distilled the art from other systems. They essentially took what they wanted from other arts and then blended them to create what has become Wing Chun. If they were alive today I believe that they would continue to incorporate things from other arts. Environment also plays a key role. If I were to fight in Alaska I would train and most likely emphasize different things than if I trained in Florida. Also if I were living in the mountains as opposed to on a boat, the training would vary. If I lived in the wrestling capitol of the world and was most likely to face a grappler then I would most likely put more emphasis on learning how to counter a grappler.

Does Wing Chun have everything it needs??? Since it is a conceptual system one could argue that it does. It is not the techniques which is important but the understanding of the concepts behind the techniques. However, perhaps it is this very conceptual framework which enables one to explore other arts and then take what one wants to build it upon the fundemental framework of Wing Chun.

If I may make a simple suggestion; I would encourage everyone to read a book, Living the Martial Way this book covers the concept of living life as a martial artist. It is not a training book per se but is one which can serve as a guide to becoming a martial artist.

Bottom line, I personally feel that if one has a firm foundation then one can, if they wish, explore other arts.

Peace,

Dave

[kungfu cowboy]

I have noticed that this question never garners agreement on all sides.:)

My opinion is that you should do what you like, and that there perhaps are different arts that specialize and do better in different situations.

[TjD]

fear not the man who practices 100 things 10 times,
but the man who practices 1 thing 1000 times

when it comes time to throw down, i'd rather be real good at a few things, than mediocre at a lot of things. in a real fight you wont have time to sift through the 10 different styles youve learned to find something that works.

[Sihing73]

Hello TJD,

I agree with you in principle however I do not think there is anything wrong with exploring other arts if you would like. Read my posts and you will notice I make a distinction between quality and quantity.

If you look at the history of several past masters you may notice that many of them crosstrained in more than one art. Not a large sampling but a definite cross section. I think that the key is that each one first mastered their respective arts before exploring others. Also once they did begin to train in other arts the goal seemed to be to use the new knowledge to enhance what was already learned.

I guess the key is first to buld that firm foundation and then expand. Again quality rather than quantity. Still, variation is the spice of life :p

Peace,

Dave

[Atleastimnotyou]

Originally posted by anerlich


Whereas others, your sifu Carl Dechiara for example (according to red5angel), took taiji,

Lots of people in wing chun take other martial arts like bjj for example, because they feel that wing chun doesn't provide for everything. It is our (lineages) opinion that wing chun takes care of everything. Carl and his students have decided to do tai chi not because wing chun lacks something, but because it "enhances" our wing chun. And when i say "enhance," i mean tai chi smooths out or movements, relaxes us, and and teaches us how to control or bodies. We understand that wing chun alone is wonderful and all that's needed in a fighting situation, but we think tai chi helps us improve at our wing chun.

[old jong]

Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
but we think tai chi helps us improve at our wing chun.

I have heard these comments from others before and (IMO)I don't know why or how tai-chi could improve somebody's Wing Chun!...We have our SLT to make us relax,find our root and learn the proper Wing Chun energy use.We also have CK to learn how to use all of this in motions when we are ready.
Why should we have to practice a completely different art to get better in Wing Chun?...It is like practicing guitar to get better at the piano!

I prefer to hear that someone is learning tai-chi because he likes it for some reasons or BJJ because he feels like knowing ground fighting is a good bonus thing to have in his arsenal.

[yuanfen]

atleastiamnot you-is self contradictory, but no matter...OTOH he sez- you dont need anything besides wc---like bjj etc..otoh he sez:taichi improves his wing chun.

BTW a two year more or less student of mine was looking up schools in Minneapolis... at first he couldnt find much... found one
in Wisconsin -- too far. Then found a Minneapolis website and
apparently visited a school where the goal was to become like their absent leader.. Was singularly unimpressed
with the training regimen which apparently was not all wing chun.
Any more ideas?

[TjD]

if your wing chun isnt that good without tai chi, wasn't it missing something?

chi sau and siu lim tau contain everything you need to learn how to relax, control your body and move smoothly, perhaps your doing them incorrectly? :D (to play the devil's advocate)

[TjD]

Originally posted by Sihing73
Hello TJD,

I agree with you in principle however I do not think there is anything wrong with exploring other arts if you would like. Read my posts and you will notice I make a distinction between quality and quantity.

If you look at the history of several past masters you may notice that many of them crosstrained in more than one art. Not a large sampling but a definite cross section. I think that the key is that each one first mastered their respective arts before exploring others. Also once they did begin to train in other arts the goal seemed to be to use the new knowledge to enhance what was already learned.

I guess the key is first to buld that firm foundation and then expand. Again quality rather than quantity. Still, variation is the spice of life :p

Peace,

Dave

i agree wholeheartedly,

many of the people who come to our school to just learn another style to rack onto their already long list of styles they've "learned" for a month seem to want the pretty house, without spending the time on its foundation

still, when it comes down to a fight, if your confused with all the 3000 things youve learned and never mastered, your worse off than the guy who just practiced 1000 chain punches every day

[{i^(]

"still, when it comes down to a fight, if your confused with all the 3000 things youve learned and never mastered, your worse off than the guy who just practiced 1000 chain punches every day"

I tend to think thats the advantage AND the problem. Wing Chun often seems (to me) the World's Most Boring Martial Art because of the endless nitpicking and repetition of every little detail...I know thats where it all comes from, but sometimes it's so frustrating.

So, I'm sometimes quite jealous of those who've found other things to do, especially if they've found good teachers with which to study, interesting arts, etc. Hey, more power to them, I say.

I won't say that wing chun is improved to any great degree by another art, but it is informed by other arts, by using/viewing their approaches in contrast to it's own, esp. CLF, BagGua, etc.

[Atleastimnotyou]

yuanfen:
I said that imo wing chun was all that is need in a fighting situation, but some people take bjj and wing chun. Now you think that since i do wing chun and tai chi i am contradicting myself. but im not cuz i don't wouldn't us tai chi in a fighting situation like other people would use bjj.

Old jong:
you said, "We have our SLT to make us relax,find our root and learn the proper Wing Chun energy use.We also have CK to learn how to use all of this in motions when we are ready." And i totally agree with you on that.
but when you say "Why should we have to practice a completely different art to get better in Wing Chun?...It is like practicing guitar to get better at the piano!" Your wrong on this count. Tai chi and wing chun aren't completly different. I am NOT saying that Tai Chi and wing chun are the same, but they are complements of eachother. Two completely different martial arts are like: Wing Chun and bjj. Wing chun and tai chi are like practicing the banjo to get better at the guitar. I agree that wing chun has the forms which make you more relaxed, smooth, and teach body control. But in the Tai chi form, you are moving around a lot more so body control and smoothness are harder to acheive. So the more you acheive in that... it will then translate into your wing chun too. I am not saying that you "need" to take tai chi, you don't, wing chun is perfect by itself. But in my opinon, tai chi helps.

TJD:
I did NOT say that "wing chun isn't any good without tai chi." Wing chun is great and it does not "need" tai chi... I just think that the smoothness and body control you get from it helps my wing chun.

[John D]

WC is an open ended system and many things can be added for personal use. However, I firmly believe as the years go by you will discover what really counts is how much you can discard. It is more important to refine useful skill and to discard collected things that have cluttered yourself with. Keep uncluttered (but not blind to other arts) and follow the WC concepts and you will bloom into a self actualized MA person.

IMO, WC already has too much! There are three arts in WC. The Fist/Leg art, the Long Staff art, and the Broadsword art! Plently of time will be required to become competent in all three areas. You will probably died before become good at all three WC arts...so plan on using several lifetimes!

Regards,
John D.

[anerlich]

Carl and his students have decided to do tai chi not because wing chun lacks something, but because it "enhances" our wing chun.

Semantics. I could make the same argument for the other things I practice as well. My argument is with the apparent assertion that you, Carl and red5angel are somehow "purer" or "understand WC better" than those of us who "cross-train" rather than "train in other systems to enhance". The guy riding on the high horse rightly gets the derision of those who have their feet closer to the ground.

If you take the blinkers off, WC can make your BJJ better, and BJJ can make your WC better, standup as well as on the ground. As can taiji, escrima, judo, etc.. FWIW, I studied taiji for five years though I don't practice it any more. IMO there are more useful things to practice, but YMMV.

I agree with what John said about WC being an open-ended system. You can integrate other things into it if you understand what you are doing and apply it to situations that the "old masters" never experienced. There's "too much to learn", but that's true of everything, try staying on the cutting edge of IT, my profession, in more than one small niche. But if you try to master just one small thing, IMO you miss out on heaps of other interesting and worthwhile stuff.

I think exploring other arts is a good idea. Obviously you and Carl do as well.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
yuanfen:
I said that imo wing chun was all that is need in a fighting situation, but some people take bjj and wing chun. Now you think that since i do wing chun and tai chi i am contradicting myself. but im not cuz i don't wouldn't us tai chi in a fighting situation like other people would use bjj.

Glad you told me you're not contradicting yourself or I might not have noticed. :) Methinks you dost protest too much. If you take Taiji from the same teacher as you study Wing Chun, but it's not used for fighting, what is it good for? What does it add to your Wing Chun? I think the concepts are not the same in the two arts in question. You are adhering simultaneously to two contradictory positions, saying that cross-training different arts is bad except when you do it. :)


Old jong:
you said, "We have our SLT to make us relax,find our root and learn the proper Wing Chun energy use.We also have CK to learn how to use all of this in motions when we are ready." And i totally agree with you on that.

But, again, aren't you contradicting yourself? Ask yourself why in your lineage, did Yip Man, Leung Sheung, and Chung Man Nien (Ken Chung), only need to study and teach Wing Chun?


but when you say "Why should we have to practice a completely different art to get better in Wing Chun?...It is like practicing guitar to get better at the piano!" Your wrong on this count. Tai chi and wing chun aren't completly different.

Oh, no? On what systemic principles are Wing Chun and Taiji the same?


I am NOT saying that Tai Chi and wing chun are the same, but they are complements of eachother. Two completely different martial arts are like: Wing Chun and bjj. Wing chun and tai chi are like practicing the banjo to get better at the guitar.

Mention of banjos always makes me think of Deliverance. :) I tend to agree with Anerlich that BJJ or jiu jitsu and Wing Chun are complementary. Taiji seems to be just close enough to lead you off course.


I agree that wing chun has the forms which make you more relaxed, smooth, and teach body control. But in the Tai chi form, you are moving around a lot more so body control and smoothness are harder to acheive. So the more you acheive in that... it will then translate into your wing chun too. I am not saying that you "need" to take tai chi, you don't, wing chun is perfect by itself. But in my opinon, tai chi helps.

We'd be better off putting in the time on Wing Chun.


TJD:
I did NOT say that "wing chun isn't any good without tai chi." Wing chun is great and it does not "need" tai chi... I just think that the smoothness and body control you get from it helps my wing chun.
I think you like Taiji practice, which is fine. But when it comes down to which approach makes you better at Wing Chun, I'd hafta' say, it's staying the course and learning Wing Chun. There are no short-cuts.

Oh, yes. I have trained in lots of other martial arts, so I have some perspective. :)

Regards,

[Rolling_Hand]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you like Taiji practice, which is fine. But when it comes down to which approach makes you better at Wing Chun, I'd hafta' say, it's staying the course and learning Wing Chun. There are no short-cuts.
Oh, yes. I have trained in lots of other martial arts, so I have some perspective. --from Grendel
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Well said, you want to be seen as reliable, not demanding.

A point in every direction is no point at all.

A true wing chun man lives between two points.

Humm.....

[Wingman]

There has been a lot of discussion about whether or not tai chi will help your wing chun. I'd like to express my opinion since I practice both arts. I practice only tai chi early in the morning and only WC in the evening. I don't mix both arts.

Tai chi and WC have similarities and differences. Both Tai chi and WC don't use force against force. Both don't resist an incoming force. We can safely say that have the same principles when dealing with a particular situation.

The difference between tai chi and WC is how they implement/execute the above principles. Tai chi tends to yield to an incoming force. Tai chi deflects the force to the side by twisting/turning the waist and using circular footwork. Tai chi is like a reed which bends when a strong wind is blowing. Remember Aesop's fable about "The Reed and the Oak"?

WC too does not "resist" an incoming force. But it doesn't yield to an incoming force in the same way as tai chi. Instead it occupies the centerline and simultaneously attacks and defends. If tai chi is like a reed, WC is like a banana tree [sic] with all its leaves cut off. In the Philippines whenever a typhoon is coming, we cut off all the leaves of the banana so that it won't offer resistance to the wind. When the typhoon does come, the banana does not bend like the reed.

Going back to the question, "Does tai chi help your WC and vice versa?" Using the analogy of the reed and the banana, does it help the reed in dealing with the wind if imitates how the banana deals with the wind? How about the banana?

[black and blue]

Tai Chi is a reed
Wing Chun is a banana.

:D

I so love that :D :) :D :)

[Atleastimnotyou]

Grendal:
Many people on this forum study wing chun and then feel that it doesn't provide for groundfighting so they cross train in bjj to make themselves a better forum. I take tai chi, not to make me a better fighter, but to make me a better wing chunner. How does it do that? I though i already said that in my last post. It's like: if you can read Chaucer well, then you will be able to read Catcher in the Rye better.
People above me in my lineage haven't studied tai chi because it is not needed for good wing chun.... which is what i have been saying. It is not needed, but it helps. it's like trying to drive somewhere in a car a certain amount of horsepower as opposed to a car with twice as much. You'll get there faster with twice as much.
How are wing chun and tai chi similar? Both teach you precision, relaxation, body control, and smoothness. they just go about it in a different way. but it is those 4 things that help your wing chun. That is why i do it.
Me doing WC and Tai chi is not the same as people who do wing chun and bjj.. Why not? because being good at bjj doesn't help you be good at WC. It will actually hurt your wing chun because it will make you tense. but doing tai chi well will help you be better at WC.. (for those 4 reasons i said above) Disclaimer: i NEVER said you HAVE TO take tai chi in order to be good at wing chun. You can be good at wing chun without it as we all know. (i have said this every post)
"We'd be better off putting in the time on Wing Chun." Then i hope you don't do bjj.

[black and blue]

Hi. You wrote: "being good at bjj doesn't help you be good at WC. It will actually hurt your wing chun because it will make you tense".

I don't believe this to be true. The BJJ I have seen has its focus on relaxation and correct body positioning. Being tense isn't desirable on the ground either. The concepts found in BJJ are not a million miles away from those found in WC, IMHO.

[planetwc]

Question: Have you studied BJJ and if so, can you describe which portions of the training lead one to being "tense"?

Every description I've read of properly trained BJJ centers around conserving energy, using sensitivity to feel openings in your opponent and training for positioning to bring on submission.

And in fact teachers like the folks at Kamon Wing Chun have indicated that BJJ was quite a NATURAL extension of their Wing Chun.

On the other hand I would think that Taiji with it's emphasis on coiling and spriral energy as well as extensive use of dan tien rotation are quite different from the principles of Wing Chun.

I do see that the models of sensitivity training are congruent in the development of listening skills, but it would still seem like the framework or platform of delivery is quite different. And this is after attending Chen Qing Zhou's first ever US seminar, and playing briefly with some other Yang style Taiji folks.

That said, to each their own, I'm just more curious about your assertions regarding BJJ and your practical experience training in it.


Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
Grendal:
Many people on this forum study wing chun and then feel that it Me doing WC and Tai chi is not the same as people who do wing chun and bjj.. Why not? because being good at bjj doesn't help you be good at WC. It will actually hurt your wing chun because it will make you tense. but doing tai chi well will help you be better at WC.. (

[fa_jing]

Playing the guitar WILL help you play the piano. In fact, most musical instruments are complimentary that way. And 95% of serious musicians play more than one instrument, even if it's just dabbling. You won't get confused, because you are handling the instrument and see it and the music is even written differently sometimes. Whereas with empty hands, and the necessity of improvisation (dynamic situation) I would think it is easier to get confused between MA. So a good analogy, but not a perfect analogy. The developing of similar attributes is the same, but the potential for confusion is not.

[TjD]

how can it be the true best wing chun, if it needs tai chi? i dont recall ever hearing about yip man teaching tai chi

[Rolling_Hand]

--how can it be the true best wing chun, if it needs tai chi?--TjD

**Don't be too quick to pin things down. Red5angel may has a good answer for you....hahaha!

[UltimateFighter]

The bottom line is this: You must know striking and grappling. Almost all traditional styles only teach one and you must therefore learn to fight at your weakest range.

Wing Chun alone is not enough to make you a complete fighter, no matter how long you train it. That is becasue it lacks grappling, throwing, choking and locking. You must learn a style which teaches you these techniques if you are to become a complete fighter.

My advice would be to stick with just wing chun for about 3 years, and then if you have time do an additional style like Judo or BJJ, or drop Wing chun entirely for a while and concentrate on the other style. You can always return to Wing Chun at a later date, and it will improve your ability as a fighter significantly.

But I will say that learning more than 2 styles is too much. If you do 2, you can focus on them and master them both. More than that and you will become a jack of all trades, master of none.

[Rolling_Hand]

--Wing Chun alone is not enough to make you a complete fighter, no matter how long you train it.--Ult

**Another Yoda Yoda from the blue moon mountain!

--That is becasue it lacks grappling, throwing, choking and locking. You must learn a style which teaches you these techniques if you are to become a complete fighter.--Ult

**Something is still missing... where is the *AK47* ?

[TjD]

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
The bottom line is this: You must know striking and grappling. Almost all traditional styles only teach one and you must therefore learn to fight at your weakest range.


not true at all; you can take your wing chun and train against being taken down. that way your not split up between striking and grappling. if you practice vs grapplers, and practice against being taken down while using your wing chun, you'll be better off than doing the two arts seperately; imho.

that way you can put all of your time towards the one art, which has more than enuff to keep yourself busy with anyhow :)

you learn how to not get into your weakest range

[planetwc]

How many people here train WITH grapplers against being taken down?

How many hours in each class, how many times per week is this particular training done?

How many grapplers can prevent THEMSELVES from being taken down?

I always hear these arguments as a sop against having a background in groundfighting and grappling. Yet I wonder how many folks ACTUALLY train against people who are skilled in takedowns and grappling.


Originally posted by TjD


not true at all; you can take your wing chun and train against being taken down. that way your not split up between striking and grappling. if you practice vs grapplers, and practice against being taken down while using your wing chun, you'll be better off than doing the two arts seperately; imho.

that way you can put all of your time towards the one art, which has more than enuff to keep yourself busy with anyhow :)

you learn how to not get into your weakest range

[Atleastimnotyou]

Originally posted by TjD
how can it be the true best wing chun, if it needs tai chi? i dont recall ever hearing about yip man teaching tai chi

I can't believe you actually said that. (unless you're playing, which you might be) did you even read my posts? in every single post, i have said wing chun didn't need tai chi and then i explained my reasons for practicing it.


Crimsonking:
I don't beleive that tai chi conflicts with WC. i know that they have different movements but WC is instilled in my body as a natural reaction. so i wouldn't be in a fight wondering what i should do, WC or tai chi. WC would just natuarly come out.

Ultimate Fighter:
I don't beleive that you need to practice grappling. I just got back from a one of Ken Chung's seminars this weekend, and he doesn't worry about wrestlers or bjj. he demenstrated what would happen if a guy tried to take him down, and after witnessing that... i can say i don't beleive he can be taken down... i know that is a bold statement, but i saw what would happen if a guy came in on him..... and i feel sorry for the guy that does!

[fa_jing]

The hard part about stopping the takedown is that those guys drop and shoot so fast that you can be taken by surprise.

[Atleastimnotyou]

fa jing.. IMO it is not a surprise. i say that because when i guy wants to fight you, he lets you know in one way or another.. getting in your face, cussing at you whatever. if a guy is doing this, then never take your eyes off him while you try to diffuse the situation. if you do that, i don't think an attack will be a surprise.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
fa jing.. IMO it is not a surprise. i say that because when i guy wants to fight you, he lets you know in one way or another.. getting in your face, cussing at you whatever. if a guy is doing this, then never take your eyes off him while you try to diffuse the situation. if you do that, i don't think an attack will be a surprise.
Hi Corey,

Anybody can be surprised, although I have a hard time picturing it happening to Ken. :) I don't care what martial art one studies, in a fight, it's the fighter, not the art. Ken just happens to be one scary fighter with consumate Wing Chun skills. We're all human, but as he continues his Wing Chun studies, Ken says he is becoming less so. :D

Jiu Jitsu is an effective art in its own right. Although I no longer study it, it is ONE of the most complete MAs around. I just happen to believe that Wing Chun is THE most complete MA. If I didn't have access to a world class Wing Chun teacher, and there was the opportunity to study with a great Taiji or BJJ teacher.... :)

Regards,

[anerlich]

I think fa_jing was referring to the fact that there are some skilled people out there who can, say, jab/cross and then shoot as fast as your AVERAGE Wing Chun guy can throw three chain punches. I've only met a couple of people with this level of skill, but when you see it (or don't see it), it is truly scary.

If a competent striker wants to kick someone in the head, he won't make it his initial attack. Rather he'll set it up with a couple of other techniques to get the guy to drop his guard or otherwise limit his defensive options, then WHAMMO.

Similarly, the competent shooter may lead with a couple of low risk, high-percentage shots to the head to draw the guard upwards and put the opp on the back foot before dropping for the shoot. Most "Wing Chun antigrappling specialists" seem to think they're defending against someone who's going to rush them from out of range with a single highly telegraphed attack, whereas no competent fighter of any discipline is EVER going to do that.

As for "surprise", many career criminals may wait for you to *think* you've defused the situation after which they attack in earnest. Or work their way in to attack range without the aggressive "hot interview". Criminals don't want a mano a mano fight, they want to beat on someone without risk to themselves.

Geoff Thompson's material is excellent in documenting such tactics, as well as effective pre-fight strategies to counter them.

Anyway, looks like everyone on this thread cross trains or has experienced other arts, eminently sensible.

[Merryprankster]

I don't beleive that you need to practice striking. I just got back from a one of Rickson Gracie's seminars this weekend, and he doesn't worry about boxers or WC guys. he demenstrated what would happen if a guy tried to hit him, and after witnessing that... i can say i don't beleive he can't take them down... i know that is a bold statement, but i saw what would happen if a guy tried to hit him..... and i feel sorry for the guy that does! :rolleyes:

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
I don't beleive that you need to practice striking. I just got back from a one of Rickson Gracie's seminars this weekend, and he doesn't worry about boxers or WC guys. he demenstrated what would happen if a guy tried to hit him, and after witnessing that... i can say i don't beleive he can't take them down... i know that is a bold statement, but i saw what would happen if a guy tried to hit him..... and i feel sorry for the guy that does! :rolleyes:
Hi Merry,

LOL! This is the perfect counterpoint to Atleasthesnotus. Anyone can say, "I saw it at a seminar." :D

Anerlich---good points. :) Thanks for clarifiying those several points. You've manifestly had some great experience and express yourself in clear insights.

Regards,

[Atleastimnotyou]

Merryprankster, I suppose what i meant by saying what i did was that, if you want to be a great fighter, then Wing Chun is all you need. It provides for everything. If you don't think it does, maybe the applications to what you are learning were taught in away that made this hard to see. i suggest looking at other lineages then. Now this is the part where i'd say look at our lineage, but if i did that, everyone would jump down my throat for inviting people to our lineage. So i wont.:rolleyes:

[fa_jing]

Anerlich interpreted my point correctly, and the fact is that a good all-around fighter, who happens to know how to shoot, can pull off that shoot VERY fast and all of a sudden. You do need to watch your opponent like a hawk - well, a hawk with unfocused eyes LOL.

[pvwingchun]

Where I train we train ground fighting against guys who have grappling experience and kick "defense" against guys who are kickers, and good ones at that. They have seen the light and now study WC:D ....
We train against the take down from the grapplers and the attack against a kick. Very simple.

WC principles are extremely flexible, they work standing up and on the ground. Most of the techniques work on the ground as well you just have to practice using them in that situation. Thorough exploration of the principles opens up a whole new world of uses in differing situations from standing to your back flat on the ground.

But the easiest way to fight a grappler is not get taken down, don't let them get their hands on you, and against a good kicker either stay out of range or get inside of it and take the kick away.
Not always possible but with training you can turn the odds in your favor.

[Atleastimnotyou]

Originally posted by pvwingchun


But the easiest way to fight a grappler is not get taken down, don't let them get their hands on you, and against a good kicker either stay out of range or get inside of it and take the kick away.
Not always possible but with training you can turn the odds in your favor.

i agree 100% That is the way we train.

[yuanfen]

Nice talk about always standing up. In a rumble...anything can happen i.e., surprises.((But for me it does not mean that bjj is the only answer- though I have nothing against folks who do bjj etc))

[pvwingchun]

Atleastimnotyou - Do you train against guys who were kickers and grapplers, who studied that art? We have a couple of kids (well they are kids to me) who are really good kickers. And one guy who has some grappling experience in his background.

[Atleastimnotyou]

pvwingchun, we have gone over that before in class but it is not a thing we train all the time specificaly. we train the basics, the forms and chi sau.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
pvwingchun, we have gone over that before in class but it is not a thing we train all the time specificaly. we train the basics, the forms and chi sau.
Hi Corey,

Have you contended in mixed martial arts tournaments against grapplers? I'm with you in stating that Wing Chun has the tools to match up with jiu jitsu and Muay Thai, and I remain confident in my skills if I were to go to the ground, both from Wing Chun and prior ground fighting training and experience.

Regards,

[Merryprankster]

atleastimnotyou--I don't do WC or any of its other spellings. I do not know enough about WC to argue its abilities to make you into a complete fighter, competant in any position, but I digress...

I know one thing about training--if you don't practice what you do against people who are GOOD at the attack types you are defending, you are going to be in for a rude awakening when you meet it. I urge you to find a wrestler and train your WC against/with him and his style of attacks. The applications should become pretty clear if you do this. If you do not, you'll get taken down and *****ed, 99% of the time, for the simple reason that you have to knock out, or otherwise deter the grappler. He just has to get close enough to grab you, and can absorb a couple of clean shots to do this, and then you're in his world. Again, I'm not suggesting that WC can't stay on its feet--I'm pointing out that training takedown defenses against non-grapplers is equivalent to training punch defenses against non-strikers.

pvwingchun--again, I don't know enough about WC to suggest that its principles do or don't apply on the ground. I will caution, however, that the proper way of MOVING on the ground is remarkably different from standing. What often seems counterintuitive to a non-grappler is the best course of action, and what seems intuitive, the worst. Obviously sheer mat time will assist this. Kudos to your school for using the prior skills of the folks they have! I love that.

I'm not advocating that anybody go out and learn a grappling system, (although, in real life, I think it's mighty important) but realistically, there is a HUGE difference between a tackle and a shot, a bodylock and a "drunken sloppy bear hug" and non-grapplers, generally speaking, do not know how to execute. Unfortunately, most schools don't seek out grapplers to train with, and assume these attacks are the same. Nobody here would expect that if you train against the drunken roundhouse swipe, you'd be able to handle a well-balanced boxer's hook. Similarly, you can't train against a clumsily executed tackle or a simulated leg grab, and expect that defense would work against a shot--you're cheating yourself. Take your style out there and get some good grappling sparring partners!

[anerlich]

We have a couple of kids (well they are kids to me) who are really good kickers. And one guy who has some grappling experience in his background.

Dude, your school sounds somewhat impoverished. If you regard this as exposing you to the full gamut of what else is out there, IMO you're rather short of the mark.

My Sifu can kick better than most TKD black belts. Developing a comprehensive kicking arsenal is NECESSARY in our grading system. I train with about *20* guys that are really good kickers. You have one grappler? I have a classfull. I get regular exposure to some of the best grapplers in Australia, and my Sifu trains with them a couple of times a week. I'm not exactly useless at kicking or grappling myself.

[pvwingchun]

anerlich and CK never assume a simple a statement tells the whole story.

"Dude, your school sounds somewhat impoverished. If you regard this as exposing you to the full gamut of what else is out there, IMO you're rather short of the mark."

I never said this was exposure to the full gamut nor did I explain everything we do, or everyone and their skills I simply stated a few examples. The kickers (kids) I refer to have many years of TKD experience, I said they are kids to me.

We study WC that is what we do, we use the others and the skills that they bring to the table as tools. We spar, we train in ground fighting using WC princilples using those individuals who have skill on the ground, we train against kickers using WC priciples and techniques, that is what we do. We don't cross train we do WC. We use WC and its techniques and principles and explore them in situations from standing to flat on your back. No art is complete but WC has principles and techniques that can be utilized in all areas all you need to do is work at it.


MP good to hear from you.

[aussielung]

hi there everyone, good to meet you all.

just wanted to answer the question on the first page. i haven't looked over the rest of the thread so if this has been said before i'm sorry to repeat anything.

anyway, in my oppinion there are advantages and disadvantages to learning more than one style. i currently learn 4 style's. wing chun is my main style (ie: i can use it better) with lung ying being the my secondary style and lau ha ba fa and choi lai fa training to enhance and improve balance and fluidity in my wing chun and lung ying training.

the advantages i have found in learning all 4 styles are that i can incorporate techniques that other wing chun practicioners may not know and you have a brouder range to work with in a self defence situation.

the down side is that there isn't enough time to master all 4 styles. the best way to combat that is by haveing one style be the main style (like i said, i'm better at wing chun) then just useing the other styles to enhance your primary style (see why i train lau ha ba fa and choi lai fa).

i give equal attention to training wing chun and lung ying because the two styles complement each other, this means i train wing chun for say half an hour and lung ying half an hour each day on average. i will be training more now that i have a new job and can devote more time to it. lau ha ba fa and choi lai fa i only train about 10 minutes a day.

[Rolling_Hand]

--give equal attention to training wing chun and lung ying because the two styles complement each other, this means i train wing chun for say half an hour and lung ying half an hour each day on average. i will be training more now that i have a new job and can devote more time to it. lau ha ba fa and choi lai fa i only train about 10 minutes a day.--ausielung

Hi ausisielung,

Where did you learn the lau ha ba fa boxing?
And who's your teacher?

RH

[aussielung]

i am a student of barry pang sifu in melbourne. i've been learning his martial arts for almost a year and a half.

sifu comes from a mixed background, he has trained a veriaty of different style from china and other parts of china since he was a child and found wing chun to be the easiest and most effective style to teach.

he learnt lung ying from wu sifu (i thinks his full name is spelt wu hai tai, but i can't be sure) after meeting wu sifu is hong kong in the 70's. they where talking about there respected styles, sifu was already teaching wing chun by this time and wu sifu only had 5 students (all family members). when both men realized that lung ying was the signiture style of Ng Mai while she was in shaolin temple sifu asked wu sifu to show him the style and subsequently become wu sifu's only student (along with sifu's wife) who where not family members.

after mastering the style wu sifu asked sifu to teach the style to his students in melbourne because his own children and son inlaw had no wish to teach themselves.

wu sifu was also a master of lau ha ba fa and tai chi and taught lau ha ba fa to sifu for the same reason that sifu teaches it to us.

wu sifu was a student of lum yu kwai sigung, the first person outside shaolin temple to learn lung ying. i don't mean to sound like i'm big noting my lung ying lineage because i personaly think that a lineage doesn't make a person a better martail artist, but it is an interesting tid bit of lung ying history.




it's good to meet you all.

[UltimateFighter]

Originally posted by crimsonking

On 'is wing chun complete' - wing chun cannot NOT be complete - its a conceptual system, the possibilities are infinite, the only limits are those you place on it yourself.

A good wing chunner should be able to destroy a boxer on his first jab, a shooter will be no different.


What complete crap!

Please don't tell me you actually believe what you wrote. If ever the words 'deluded' and 'brainwashed' came to mind it was now.

First up, you are mistaking Wing Chun for Jeet Kun Do. Wing Chun has not got endless possibilities. It is a deffinite style, and therefore has deffinite limitations. Like I said, no where in the forms or training will you learn how to apply chokes and armlocks in wing chun. Hence it is limited as being a striking style. Turn off the bull**** meter.

As for your second comment, if a wing chun guy could so easily beat a boxer or shootfighter, they would have done it in MMA. They have not , becasue they can't. Wing chun is for Standup only. Even for standup, it is not the best style. A good style, but definately not the best. That honour undoubtedly belongs to Muay Thai. BTW, in mixed 'standup fighting matches', Muay Thai fighters have a history of KO'ing Wing chun fighters very often. Just read the Hawkins Cheung articles about his trouble against Mauy Thai.

Wing Chun is a good style. But brainwashing yourself to think that it is 'complete' is setting yourself up for an ass whooping like never before.

[S.Teebas]

Why are you learning WC? Why not go and learn Muay Thai?

[yuanfen]

S,Teebas- re Ultimate fighter-
forgive him- he knows what he sez. Like many he mistakenly ssumes that wing chun will be self evident to the casual observer.

[{i^(]

It was stated badly and with needless offense (we all get like this time to time) but there are valid concerns and points raised by this post. Wing Chun is, as stated, an art, and it does have limitations or areas where it is simply better than others, take your pick. Simple reality, and reality is needed to estimate any art fairly. What it doesn't contain comprises a fairly long list.

The reply usually goes, 'if you can't see the endless possibilities, then it's a lack of imagination on your part that's at fault'. Fine and dandy, but no definitive answer is forthcoming from such replies, and often the responder cannot tell the questioner anything he can use. He hasn't 'stress-tested' the art in these areas, just imagined what he'd do. It's called 'blaming the victim' or 'oneupmanship', if you prefer.

So, it absolutely comes across as 'brainwashing' when speakers tout 'completeness' as a selling point in one breath, then say 'well, we don't concentrate on X' in another. As a mantra, "why can't you see how special I am?" is eerie evidence for a feminine origin of the art....If I had dollar for how many times I've responded 'hunh?' to that....I'd have enough for a whole BOX of doh-nitz. And coffee, maybe...

Aussielung: Welcome, first. A question: did you study these arts all at once, or were they introduced in a particular order? I've heard that one should take an art for awhile first, gain expertise to a certain level, then explore- if that's what they still want to do. Some of these are long-fist styles, is that correct? How do these complement your WC?

[yuanfen]

{i^(
posts

Wing Chun is, as stated, an art, and it does have limitations or areas where it is simply better than others, take your pick. Simple reality, and reality is needed to estimate any art fairly. What it doesn't contain comprises a fairly long list.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMO FWIW much depends on the individual and what he has been exposed to practiced and mastered. It is natural to be curious and make inquiries about other arts. If someone thinks they have a weakness,it is also natural to try and strengthen that
weakness in the individual. But you cant exactly transfer your personal enhancement to a student whose strengths and weaknesses may be different from one's own.Unlessa fun****etal concept in the art is changed-the art is the art and a personal enhancement is a personal enhancement- not necessarily an improvement in the art. The art is larger than any one artist. many comments about the limitations of the art that I have often seen comes(understandably) from the perspective of the commentator. There are however folks who are quite deeply into the art and "stress tested" its implications in contexts where the other fellows primary specialty is grappling, breaking,
throwing, joint locks, or other forms of striking.The versatility of wing chun is widely underestimated IMO. One doesnt have to mechanically be technique oriented and think of ranges or fighting horizontally or otherwise. Its still you and if you have trained the you sufficiently= wing chun reflexes take over in your adaptations to whatever you are presented with.
Sorry for any keying errors like the last post..

[UltimateFighter]

It is a PATHETIC way of thinking that many people who post here such as yourself have that the style they train is the 'best' and is 'complete'. Just becase you do a style does not mean you neccessairly think it is the best. I get very ****ed when I see people mis-informing and talking bull by stating "Wing Chun is the best becasue of the concepts blah blah blah and can cope with any range even though it fails in any mma or fight".

The question is, the best at what? Idiots think Wing Chun is the best style in existence and that it is unbeatable. People with some sense of reality and knowledge realise that it is a very complete standup system but you need grappling to supplement it to fight on the ground and to apply chokes and locks.

I find it laughable that you wonder why I study WIngTsun becasue I "question" its ability to succceed in any situation.

I have do WT becasue it is an excellent standup style. I find Chi-sau interesting and I think close range sensitivity complements my Judo. There are no Muay Thai classes near my area, so WT seems a good alternative. However, I am not moronic enough to convince myself that it is 'the best' just becasue I do it, which it seems many like you tend to do.

To be the best you have to prove it. Muay Thai has proven itself as the best standup style in MMA. WC/WT has not. Until it has, it can NEVER claim to be the best standup style. And no 'eye gouge' arguments help, as Mauy Thai can use eye gouges also.

So in summary I say that you should use your brain more. Just becasue you do a style doesn't mean you have to believe it is the best. But just becasue it is not the best does not mean it can't be very good and interesting for other reasons.

[UltimateFighter]

On a final note. Muay Thai and Wing Chun are actually related styles. I think the no. 1 reason Muay Thai is more successful id becasue of the way they train (i.e full contact sparring). If Wing Chun did more of this it would definately have a greater degree of success than it does.

[Sandman2[Wing Chun]]

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
On a final note. Muay Thai and Wing Chun are actually related styles. .

UltimateFighter,
I have to completely disagree with you on this one. Out of curiosity, what makes you think they are related?

[yuanfen]

UltimateFighter
Just becase you do a style does not mean you neccessairly think it is the best.

((Poor thinking if you deliberately doa second best style))

I get very ****ed when I see people mis-informing and talking bull by stating "Wing Chun is the best becasue of the concepts blah blah blah and can cope with any range even though it fails in any mma or fight".

((If you are ****ed too often- its not good for you))



I find it laughable that you wonder why I study WIngTsun becasue I "question" its ability to succceed in any situation.

I have do WT becasue it is an excellent standup style. I find Chi-sau interesting and I think close range sensitivity complements my Judo.

(You show little understanding of chi sao))



To be the best you have to prove it.

(9I dont need to prove anything- specially on the net))

Muay Thai has proven itself as the best standup style in MMA. WC/WT has not. Until it has, it can NEVER claim to be the best standup style. And no 'eye gouge' arguments help, as Mauy Thai can use eye gouges also.

((Each to his own- hope that you find a good muay thai teacher.
Eye gouge is a technique- I dont talk technique.))

So in summary I say that you should use your brain more.

((Sarcasm ignored))

Just becasue you do a style doesn't mean you have to believe it is the best. But just becasue it is not the best does not mean it can't be very good and interesting for other reasons.


((Why waste time with less than the best?Strange thinking))

[{i^(]

The blowup is interesting (to me) as further data of frustration percieved (if not content-driven), and I can relate to frustration.

One thing you wrote was, "The art is larger than any one artist"- true, but this is the source, sometimes, for hurt egos, miscues, disrespect. Sometimes you criticise the art and you're mistaken for criticising artist or teacher.

Lately, I'm wondering if there is a generalized flaw in pedagogy within wing chun. Ip Man was said to have streamlined his teaching methods and also to have sought out "intelligent" students, which is also a byword for "cultured, educated". A supposition posed: could it be that a kind of thinking common to that time and place was not taught, because assumed?

Consider: it is 'fact' (because I say so 8P) that alot of students go on to study either more deeply eastern arts (taiji being the prime examplar) for deeper TCM understanding, OR they go for physically oriented western thingamajigs like BJJ. They're looking for depth that they're not percieving in WC. I'm not saying it's not there to be had, but am suggesting that (pedagogically speaking) it is not being transmitted. This cannot be said to be the fault of the teacher, as they teach what they know and they know what they've recieved, which as I suggest could've been altered.

Or perhaps its nothing or there's nothing else. It may be that Ip Man's goals were best served by Bruce Lee, in that he rejected traditional premises. Ip Man himself wished to free his students from the 'prison' of tradition. Thus the enigmatic smile when posed with Bruce....?

[yuanfen]

{i^(

yuanfen
The blowup is interesting (to me) as further data of frustration percieved (if not content-driven), and I can relate to frustration.

((Yes, blowups tell a lot))

One thing you wrote was, "The art is larger than any one artist"- true, but this is the source, sometimes, for hurt egos, miscues, disrespect. Sometimes you criticise the art and you're mistaken for criticising artist or teacher.

((True. I was addressing the art or trying to-often unsuccessfully))))

Lately, I'm wondering if there is a generalized flaw in pedagogy within wing chun.

((Yes-pedagogy atleast includes-1. sufficient knowledge of the art 2. Interest in sharing it. 3. discriminating between students based on values, ability and tuition 4. the ability to convey the concepts if 1-3 are in place. IMO- Ip Man is/was superb in #1.
Cagey and varying in #2. Very discriminating in #3 specially in the last item- all other things being equal. Superb in #4 IMO if
1-3 are in place. He wouldnt have cared about a best teacher award and a certficate and a watch given by Slippery Rock U-oops I hope there are SRU graduates here. Ip Man had superb exposure to the art and he had the gift of helping the art along.
And he was no braggart- but he was a survivor in the real world-
testing his art for his own confirmation. Kung fu artists were interested in verifying things for themselves- what works and what doesnt. Kung fu is different from Chemistry 101 and public demonstration of the proof of the theorems. Old style artists are/were interested in maintaining an edge. To learn from real artists you had to be accepted for sustained mentoring evn if
you have the red envelope.))

Ip Man was said to have streamlined his teaching methods and also to have sought out "intelligent" students, which is also a byword for "cultured, educated". A supposition posed: could it be that a kind of thinking common to that time and place was not taught, because assumed?
((Tacit knowledge is important in many fields.While wing chun arose out of the rebellions in China by Leung Jan's time and later Ip Man's time "class" status entered in apparently-propertied folks, professionals, doctors etc. If Ip Man didnt end up penniless in HK and Macao- I very much doubt that he would have taught much.... except even more selectively than has been the case.
Talking like this on the net can easily sound arrogant but I am really trying to share a sense of the subject and hoping and willing to listen to others on the subject of wing chun pedagogy))

Consider: it is 'fact' (because I say so 8P) that alot of students go on to study either more deeply eastern arts (taiji being the prime examplar) for deeper TCM understanding, OR they go for physically oriented western thingamajigs like BJJ. They're looking for depth that they're not percieving in WC.

((They dont get it in taiji either. It is a rare student who is tutored in depth by peole like Feng Zi Quan, Chen Xiao Wang amonga few. BJJ is a more external art- but even there I would guess that what Rickson conveys to Royce ina private conversation or workout is not exactly the same that one gets in a public seminar.))

I'm not saying it's not there to be had, but am suggesting that (pedagogically speaking) it is not being transmitted.

((IMHO- it is not))

This cannot be said to be the fault of the teacher, as they teach what they know and they know what they've recieved, which as I suggest could've been altered.

((Complex question--- sometimes its the teachers inadequacy-actually often. But often enough it is the student who does not demand the best and settles for rhetoric and advertisemnt and
designation of status(levels, belts, sashes). Kung fu involves
turning out good people one by one...no wonder that the art of choice for the Taiwanese army used to and maybe still is TKD))


Or perhaps its nothing or there's nothing else. It may be that Ip Man's goals were best served by Bruce Lee, in that he rejected traditional premises.
((ARRGH-No IMO. Even in boxing- no matter how innovative you still spend hours straightening out the jab. Tradition and innovation are interlinked. Even in rejecting things we need to understand what it is that we are rejecting- baby- bathwater etc))

Ip Man himself wished to free his students from the 'prison' of tradition.

((Are you sure he said that?? All kinds of perceptions are often settled for prematurely as truths))

Thus the enigmatic smile when posed with Bruce....?

((Read in what you want to. remember he wouldnt give Bruce his dummy form. Maybe the the enigmatic smile=this man wants his picture taken after enough dim sum tea and gifts. He was a cagey and secretive man IMO... but the glimpses one gets about
what he knew gives some folks touches of a superb art. If the current and futtre generation rather than engaging in cheap shots create an atmosphere of sharing- they could come close to solving the jigsaw puzzle. Isnt all true knowledge a form of solving puzzles?)) Yuanfen

[AndrewS]

Ultimate,

a few points-

standing arm-locks and the basic principles of how WT locks and escapes are contained in the first and second forms, and formally taught in the 2nd section chi sao. From what I understand, we tend to eschew chokes for direct attack of the larynx, and rapid neck manipulations.

taking the principles of WT to the ground makes for very effective floor work. While I'm not going to tap out a serious MMA, I can control positions and escape on most guys of similar size and experience (and defend the takedown ok). Add hits in and life gets better for me.

I tend to agree with you on one style not being the 'best'. If a style contains certain learning environments and addresses well a number fighting scenarios based on principle, not technique, after that things are left up to the individual exponent.

Arts often conform to environment in which they are meant to be practiced. Mui Thai and boxing are great arts in the ring, because that's where they were born and bred. You'll notice that those guys become a bit less light with their footwork, stay a bit lower with their hands, and keep more upright in MMA competition- concerned over a possible takedown. Change the environment to a more variable and less forgiving surface in which random bodies and attackers may pop up and even those modifications will not provide as much stability as the stepping and posture of Wing Chun. The prolonged 'feeling out' process which occurs in much ring fighting is *dependant* on the existence of a certain amount of space and both combatants being aware of conflict prior to its ensual. Most ring fighters become profoundly uncomfortable when they don't have that space to work with- and few real fights occurs in a nice flat area of appropriate square footage. A low shoot or high kick to leg submission transition are beautiful in the ring- but **** few people are foolhardy enough to attempt them on asphalt.

MMA is one on one fighting when you know someone will stop the fight at a certain point and no one else will join in. The ground is nice and soft, and in some fights there are walls you can use (UFC octagon) in others you fight in a field (Pride's reset to the center of the ring).

Make the ground hard, soft, slippery. Change the odds so that 3, 5 , or ten people may be in the ring at any time, the ref may become and opponent at random time intervals- and you'll significantly change the physical approach of the practictioners of the sport.

If you want to go do MMA, go do MMA. If you're training for self-defense, train with some heavy contact and realism, but don't restrict yourself to the ****genous scenario of the ring.

Lastly- the Mui thai connection- it's a nice theory, and Leung Ting likes to trot it out, but it's by no means a carved in stone association.

Later,

Andrew

[{i^(]

I would like to see a learned discussion on WC pedagogy that didn't descend into mutual finger-pointing and trash talk. It might be enlightening. Maybe in 50 years or so.

Well, I understand your points, to the best that I can. I firmly believe that my teachers are excellent and knowledgeable, but that I'm a quite ponderous and slow thinker, given to constant nagging doubts and recrimination. It keeps me away from speculations too often flighty.

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this man looks like an idiot and acts like an idiot. Yet all this should not fool you. He is an idiot." -Groucho Marx

Its both a blessing and a curse in my studies of WC. It's really a question, methinks, of finding the best language in which to frame concerns, & finding the best way to 'imagine' the permutations, then test them.

Thank you for your comments.

[S.Teebas]

Muay Thai and Wing Chun are actually related styles.

I dont see how they are related. Can you mention a few points?
The only things i can see them related is in that legs take care of legs, arms take care of arms.
The power generation is VERY different in each of the 2 meantioned arts.


I think the no. 1 reason Muay Thai is more successful id becasue of the way they train (i.e full contact sparring). If Wing Chun did more of this it would definately have a greater degree of success than it does.

This is an interesting point. I think WC is a funny kind of art. On one hand more sparing now will make you a better fighter in the short term; and if training in an art like Muay Tai it will make you a better fighter.

Where as in WC i think sparring to early will do the opposite. It will be building bad habbits due to lack of understanding of WC's methods of fighting. ...Methods that take a long time to ingrain before you can apply them to a high pressure situation. (causing mos,; including myself, to revert to external 'techniques')

You wont understand or be able to apply Wc overnight, but IMHO i think its worth the wait. An annoying saying i once heard (annoying cause i know it's right) is: Put the hard work in now get the reward later.

[kj]

Originally posted by crimsonking
i'm training for something much less.

Or perhaps for something much more, depending in POV.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[aussielung]

Originally posted by {i^(

Aussielung: Welcome, first. A question: did you study these arts all at once, or were they introduced in a particular order? I've heard that one should take an art for awhile first, gain expertise to a certain level, then explore- if that's what they still want to do. Some of these are long-fist styles, is that correct? How do these complement your WC? [/B]

thanks for the welcome.

i learn all four style from the same sifu. we start with wing chun and lung ying stepping is also taught in the first few months of training along with yu shin (excuse my pinyin) a training technique used in lung ying. the next step is punching with stepping this takes about 3 months for most of the students. then grab/stepping and another 3 or 4 months. then the first lung ying form sup luk dun (again, excuse my pinyin) and finaly lum dar/stepping (lum dar picks the apponent up at the waist and is like a throw, i've had it used on me).

in our school it take's about a year to a year and a half to get to a level where we learn sup luk dun, i am learning it now. thats because our main focus is on wing chun. if i was to learn only lung ying i would be at lum dar level. sup luk dun takes as long to perfect at sil lim tao. it's not untill the student has got a firm grasp on this form that they move into the next form (wich is basicaly a set of kill move's and stricks) it can take years to get everything right. the thing about lung ying is you need to learn to use your feet first because if you learn sup luk dum before stepping your form becames unusable. ngah ma ( i think thats how it's spelt, it means twisted hours and is the name of the stepping drills) is the most basic thing you need in lung ying, if your ngah ma isn't good then your lung ying will be usless.

lung ying is dragon shape. our particular lung ying style comes from south shaolin and is similar to karate styles. the difference between lung ying and karate is the upper body, this is also one of the reasons why it is complementary to wing chun. basicaly, like wing chun, the power in lung ying comes from the hips while the upper body is loose and flowing the hips tighten when the feet stop and the strick connects. lung yings power is hidden to the untrained eye and unless you have a good knowledge of gung fu or lung ying itself it is very difficult to know what your looking at. also, like wing chun, body size a upper body strenght is not the main focus.

another point on lung ying and wing chuns compatability is that a person who knows how to use both styles effectively can move from wing chun on guard to lung ying on guard stance very quickly and not loose any power or strength. also there are lung ying techniques that can be used in wing chun onguard stance and vice versa. i'm not at that level myself but many of my seniours are.

we learn lau ha ba fa very slowely, over the course of about 4 or 5 years. we also only learn the last form in lau ha ba fa (wich i believe is actually called lau ha ba fa and takes about 10 to 12 minutes to perform from start to finish). the reason we don't train that style from start to finish is because we train it specificaly to obtain better relaxastion in the upper body wich improves our chi sao. also those, like the black belts, sifu and sifu's wife, are able to use alot of the techniques in wing chun stance (such as the snake hands). most people don't start learning the first few possitions in lau ha ba fa until they have been training wing chun for around 6 months, but it changes between instructors. for instance, the instructor that i have at the moment is very good at lau ha ba fa and has found it to be very importante to his wing chun training so my class has learnt it a little sooner than others. we also had a training camp in honour of our sigung who passed away last year and those who attended learnt part of the form aswell as sup luk dun earlier than those who didn't.

choi lay fa, kulda form (i know i spelt that wrong) is taught to the junior students before they learn sil lim tao. sifu found that it was dangerouse for children to stand in basic stance (training stance if you preferre that wording) for long periods of time because there bodies are still in development. it is also difficult to keep a kids attention longer than 5 minutes let alone get them to stand still for half an hour to do sil lum tao. the other benifits to training kulda to children is it improves balance and agilaty. that is also the reason why we (adult students) learn the form. the adult students learn the whole form in two parts about 2 years after they have started wing chun, it takes about 6 months to learn each section of the form and takes at least 6 months to perfect (although perfected is probably the wrong word to use, there is going to be flause in a persons form for a few years, but i think you know what i mean) the whole form once both sections have been learnt.

sorry to ramble on but i'm in a talkative mood.

[burnsypoo]

I didn't realize that Wing Chun had an On Guard stance...
hmm.